Search

Background: The internal thoracic artery (ITA) is the most important conduit for coronary artery bypass grafting. Recent evidence suggests that skeletonized ITA harvesting yields long-term outcomes inferior to those of pedicled harvesting. The aim was to investigate the impact of the ITA harvesting method on 10-year mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events., Methods and Results: In this observational cohort study, we identified all patients from the SWEDEHEART (Swedish Web-System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies) register who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting using at least 1 ITA at Karolinska University Hospital from 2012 to 2021. The main outcome was all-cause mortality, and the secondary outcomes were a combination of myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, heart failure, and stroke. Outcomes were ascertained using national health data registers and compared between the skeletonized and pedicled groups using weighted flexible parametric survival models. Among 3267 patients, 1657 (51%) underwent pedicled ITA harvesting and 1610 (49%) underwent skeletonized ITA harvesting. The patients' mean age was 66 years, and 15% were women. The weighted all-cause mortality incidence rate in the pedicled versus skeletonized ITA group was 2.6% (95CI, 2.2%-3.0%) versus 2.6% (95% CI, 2.2%-3.1%), respectively (hazard ratio (HR), 1.01 [95% CI, 0.81-1.27]). The weighted major adverse cardiovascular events incidence rate was 7.8% (95% CI, 7.1%-8.6%) versus 7.5% (95% CI, 6.7%-8.4%), respectively (HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.82-1.08])., Conclusions: We found no significant differences in all-cause mortality or major adverse cardiovascular events rates between the 2 ITA harvesting methods.

Objectives: Our goal was to compare short- and midterm outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) using 2 different revascularization strategies., Methods: A total of 6895 patients were included who had CABG in Sweden from 2009 to 2015 using the left internal mammary artery to the left anterior descending artery and either a single sequential saphenous vein graft connecting the left and right coronary territories to the aorta (snake graft, n = 2122) or separate vein grafts to both territories (n = 4773). Data were obtained from the Swedish Web System for Enhancement of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies (SWEDEHEART) and the Swedish Patient Registry. The groups were compared using adjusted logistic regression for short-term (30-day) and Cox regression and flexible parametric survival models for midterm outcomes. Primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), reangiography and new revascularization. The median follow-up time was 35 months., Results: At 30 days, the incidences of the composite end point [odds ratio (OR) 1.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03-1.68; P = 0.03] and reangiography (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.07-2.14; P = 0.02) were higher in the snake group. There was also a trend towards higher mortality (OR 1.47, 95% CI 0.97-2.22; P = 0.07). The event rates during the complete follow-up period were 6.5 (5.9-7.2) and 5.7 (5.3-6.1) per 100 person-years for the snake group and the separate vein group, respectively. At the midterm follow-up, no significant difference between the groups could be shown for the composite end point [hazard ratio (HR) 1.08, 95% CI 0.95-1.22; P = 0.24], mortality (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.79-1.14; P = 0.56), MI (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.88-1.41; P = 0.39) or new revascularization (HR 1.19, 95% CI 0.94-1.50; P = 0.15), whereas reangiography remained more common in the snake group (HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.05-1.48; P = 0.01)., Conclusions: Snake grafts were associated with a higher rate of early postoperative complications, possibly reflecting a more demanding surgical technique, whereas midterm outcomes were comparable. Based on these data, one strategy cannot be recommended over the other., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Coronary artery bypass grafting using saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) in addition to the left internal mammary artery (IMA) graft is vitiated by poor long-term patency of the vein grafts. Hypothetically, the increased use of arterial grafts could confer even better outcomes. Our goal was to evaluate results after coronary artery bypass grafting in Sweden, where arterial grafts were used as a second conduit., Methods: Within the Swedish Web System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies (SWEDEHEART) registry, we identified patients who had coronary artery bypass grafting from 2001 to 2015 using the IMA and the SVG, the radial artery (RA) or the additional IMA [bilateral IMA (BIMA)] as a second conduit. Deaths, postoperative incidence of coronary angiography and need for reintervention were recorded, and multivariable adjusted hazard ratios were calculated for different types of grafts., Results: The study population comprised 46 343 cases of IMA + SVG, 1036 cases of IMA + RA and 862 cases of BIMA. The mean follow-up time (SD) was 9.3 (4.2) years for IMA + SVG, 10.7 (4.1) years for IMA + RA grafts and 5.5 (5.0) years for the BIMA graft. The adjusted hazard ratio for death was (95% confidence interval) 1.01 (0.89-1.14) for IMA + RA and 0.87 (0.72-1.06) for BIMA grafts compared with IMA + SVG. The adjusted hazard ratio for the first angiographic examination was (95% confidence interval) 0.96 (0.84-1.10) for IMA + RA and 1.13 (0.95-1.35) for BIMA grafts. The adjusted hazard ratio for the need for reintervention was (95% confidence interval) 0.91 (0.75-1.09) for IMA + RA and 1.26 (1.00-1.58) for BIMA grafts., Conclusions: Patients who had arterial grafts as second conduits did not demonstrate a better outcome in any of the studied end-points. Radial artery grafts seem to be preferable to BIMA grafts as an alternative to an SVG., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)