Search

Background: The best revascularisation strategy for multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD) is still controversial. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) utilising drug eluting stents (DES) has emerged as an acceptable alternative to conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in the last decade. However, multiple arterial grafting (MAG) is superior revascularisation strategy compared with conventional CABG utilising single internal mammary artery and currently there is a paucity of comparison of DES and MAG. We aimed to investigate whether MAG offers advantage over DES-PCI in MVD., Methods: A total of 6126 patients with MVD (≥ 2 vessel) underwent CABG (n = 4652) or PCI (n = 1474) at a single institution. MAG was performed in 1372 CABG cases and DES were implanted in 1222 PCI cases. Propensity score adjusted analysis was performed to investigate the potential survival advantage of MAG over PCI. Mean follow-up was 4.9 years., Results: Risk for late death was comparable after DES-PCI and conventional CABG (HR 1.11; 95%CI 0.9 to 1.33; P = 0.25). However, DES-PCI was associated with an increased risk for late death compared to MAG (HR 1.53; 95%CI 1.08 to 2.91; P = 0.02). DES-PCI was also associated with a 3.51 fold increased risk for repeat revascularisation over MAG (95%CI 2.60 to 4.75; P < 0.0001) and 2.66 fold increased risk for repeat revascularisation over conventional CABG (95%CI 2.11 to 3.36; P < 0.0001)., Conclusions: MAG improved late survival and offered superior freedom from repeat revascularisation compared to DES-PCI. When feasible, MAG should be strongly recommended in patients with MVD., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite increasing recognition that off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery and total arterial revascularization individually are associated with improved outcomes, concerns persist regarding the safety of combining these two techniques. We compared in-hospital outcomes for off-pump multivessel total arterial and conventional coronary artery bypass grafting., Methods: From September 1998 to September 2008, 580 consecutive patients receiving off-pump multivessel arterial grafts only were compared with a control group of patients (n = 806) undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting with internal thoracic artery and saphenous veins operated on by the same surgeon. Two different statistical approaches were used to compare groups in this retrospective analysis. First, propensity score analysis was used to match patients from each group. Second, a multivariate analysis was performed looking at a combined patient outcome of death, intraaortic balloon counterpulsation utilization, myocardial infarction, stroke, prolonged ventilation, and reoperation for any cause on all patients in both groups., Results: After matching by propensity score, the major clinical outcomes in total arterial (n = 346) and control (n = 346) groups were found to be similar. The in-hospital mortality in the total arterial group was 1.2% as compared with 2.0% in matched patients (p = 0.8). However, patients in the total arterial group were found to have a significantly increased incidence of reexploration for bleeding (p < 0.0001) and blood product usage (p < 0.0001). There was a higher incidence of combined morbidity outcome (18.8% versus 12.1%; p = 0.001) for the control group compared with the total arterial group. Multivariate analysis failed to show that total arterial grafting was an independent predictor of the combined morbidity outcome., Conclusions: Off-pump multivessel total arterial grafting can be performed safely with superior in-hospital outcomes compared with off-pump conventional coronary artery bypass grafting.

In the last decade, there has been an upsurge of interest in less invasive alternatives to standard coronary artery bypass grafting performed with cardiopulmonary bypass. Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting is one such less invasive alternative that has seen a resurgence in the last 10 years. The development and application of the technology required has largely been driven by the hope of decreasing the incidence and/or severity of the adverse outcomes associated with cardiopulmonary bypass, the idea being to perform coronary artery bypass grafting without cardiopulmonary bypass. A number of studies that have reported the safety and efficacy of off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery have provided the impetus for the development of this technology over the last decade. Despite tremendous enthusiasm on the part of cardiac surgeons, patients, industry and the media, skepticism still exists about the actual impact of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting on the outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting. The only means of countering this skepticism is to validate the safety and efficacy of off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery through the explicit and conscientious assessment of current best evidence. This review article attempts to evaluate the current best evidence available from randomized, controlled trials in order to compare the outcomes of off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery and conventional coronary artery bypass grafting.

Recent upsurge in referral of patients with high perioperative risk or compromised left ventricular function for cardiac surgery has lead to an increasing use of pharmacologic support in the form of vasodilator and inotropic therapy to achieve improvement of tissue perfusion in the perioperative period or to support weaning from cardiopulmonary bypass. Traditionally, perioperatively used inotropic agents, epinephrine, dobutamine, and milrinone, are limited by significant increases in myocardial oxygen consumption, proarrhythmia, or neurohormonal activation. Levosimendan, a new inodilator for the treatment of decompensated heart failure, has also shown promise in elective therapy of cardiac surgical patients with high perioperative risk or compromised left ventricular function, as well as in rescue therapy of patients with difficult weaning from cardiopulmonary bypass. This review article briefly discusses the pharmacology of levosimendan and evaluates current best available evidence to assess the safety and efficacy of levosimendan usage in cardiac surgery.

The treatment of patients with coronary artery disease continues to evolve. Recent, exciting data on the use of drug-eluting stents in diseased coronary vessels has generated immense enthusiasm within the interventional community leading to claims that "drug-eluting stents will put bypass surgeons out of business." However, despite promising short-term and midterm outcomes of this revolutionary new technology, valid concerns regarding long-term safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents persist. This review article evaluates current status of drug-eluting stents with special emphasis on real and potential drawbacks of this emerging percutaneous coronary interventional modality and its impact on the practice of coronary artery bypass surgery.

The internal thoracic artery has been the most reliable graft material used in coronary artery bypass grafting with an excellent long-term patency rate. Complete myocardial revascularization with internal thoracic arteries improves long-term survival and decreases the rate of repeat operations compared with vein grafts. Adequate length of the graft in coronary artery bypass graft surgery is essential for providing complete arterial revascularization. In the last decade or so, technique of skeletonization of internal thoracic artery has been proposed to achieve extra length. Skeletonization of the internal thoracic artery allows the preparation of longer conduits with a superior free flow and can reduce the incidence of postoperative pulmonary and sternal complications. However, concerns about vasoreactivity of skeletonized internal thoracic artery grafts, the functional consequences of surgical trauma, the possible loss of innervation, and vasa vasorum perfusion in the skeletonized conduits have prevented this technique from being universally accepted. Presently available evidence from retrospective studies (level 3 evidence) suggests that skeletonization is a safe and effective technique for myocardial revascularization. However, there is a need for conducting multicenter, randomized controlled trials comparing the skeletonized and pedicled internal thoracic arteries with special emphasis on long-term patency to conclusively validate the safety and efficacy of skeletonization technique.

The discovery in 1989 of sildenafil, a highly selective inhibitor of phosphodiesterase-5 (PDE-5), was the result of extensive research on chemical agents targeting PDE-5 that might potentially be useful in the treatment of coronary heart disease. Initial clinical studies on sildenafil in the early 1990s were not promising with respect to its antianginal potential. However, the incidental discovery of its antiimpotence effect led to its approval of for the treatment of erectile dysfunction. Thereafter, several reports of adverse cardiac events in patients on sildenafil raised concerns about its safety in cardiovascular disorders. Novel therapeutic indications are emerging for sildenafil with the recent discovery that PDE-5 is expressed in various other tissues such as the arterial vasculature, including pulmonary and coronary arteries, venous vasculature, skeletal muscles, platelets, and visceral and tracheobronchial muscles. In this review we briefly summarize the pharmacology of sildenafil and the current available evidence on its potential therapeutic applications in cardiovascular disorders.