Optimal Conduit for Diabetic Patients: Propensity Analysis of Radial and Right Internal Thoracic Arteries

Meta-analysis of BITA versus SITA grafting in diabetic patients: evidence from propensity score-matched studies

BACKGROUND

It has been demonstrated that the use of bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) grafting in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) improves long-term survival in comparison to the use of a single internal thoracic artery (SITA) graft. However, the optimal transplantation technique for diabetic patients remains undetermined. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the effectiveness and safety of BITA and SITA CABG in diabetic patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of Google Scholar, Science Direct, and PubMed was conducted for studies with propensity score-matched comparing between BITA and SITA grafting in diabetic patients. The main goal was to know mid- to long-term mortality, and the supplementary results included incidence of deep sternal wound infection, 30-day mortality, and incidence of reoperation due to hemorrhage.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 11 studies involving 3762 diabetic patients with matched propensity scores. Compared to SITA grafting, BITA grafting was associated with a significant reduction in long-term mortality (HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.67-0.91), P = 0.03, I2 = 54%. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of 30-day mortality, reoperation for bleeding, cerebrovascular accident, or renal failure.

CONCLUSIONS

BITA grafting appears to provide better overall survival than SITA grafting in patients with diabetes. However, using BITA grafting is associated with a greater risk of deep sternal wound infection. These findings may help guide the choice of grafting technique in diabetic patients undergoing CABG.

Clinical and financial outcomes associated with the utilization of right internal mammary artery versus radial artery in multivessel coronary artery bypass grafting

BACKGROUND

Multi-arterial coronary bypass grafting with the left internal mammary artery as a conduit has been shown to offer superior long-term survival compared to single-arterial coronary bypass grafting. Nevertheless, the selection of a secondary conduit between the right internal mammary artery and the radial artery remains controversial. Using a national cohort, we examined the relationships between the right internal mammary artery and the radial artery with acute clinical and financial outcomes.

METHODS

Adults undergoing on-pump multivessel coronary bypass grafting with left internal mammary artery as the first arterial conduit were identified in the 2016 to 2020 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Patients receiving either the right internal mammary artery or the radial artery, but not both, were included in the analysis. Multivariable regression models were fitted to examine the association between the conduits and in-hospital mortality, as well as additional secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Of an estimated 49,798 patients undergoing multi-arterial coronary bypass grafting, 29,729 (59.7%) comprised the radial artery cohort. During the study period, the proportion of multi-arterial coronary bypass grafting utilizing the radial artery increased from 51.3% to 65.2% (nptrend <0.001). Following adjustment, the radial artery was associated with reduced odds of in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio 0.44), prolonged mechanical ventilation (adjusted odds ratio 0.78), infectious complications (adjusted odds ratio 0.69), and 30-day nonelective readmission (adjusted odds ratio 0.77, all P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Despite no definite endorsement from surgical societies, the radial artery is increasingly utilized as a secondary conduit in multi-arterial coronary bypass grafting. Compared to the right internal mammary artery, the radial artery was associated with lower odds of in-hospital mortality, complications, and reduced healthcare expenditures. These results suggest that whenever feasible, the radial artery should be the favored conduit over the right internal mammary artery. Nevertheless, future studies examining long-term outcomes associated with these vessels remain necessary.

Diagnostic radiology methods for assessing coronary artery bypass graft viability

The review describes available modern radiological methods which are currently applied for a detailed and comprehensive anatomical and functional assessment of the viability of various coronary artery bypass grafts. In addition, it presents some aspects of the implementation of these methods and clinical interpretation of the results.

Single Versus Multiple Arterial Revascularization in Patients With Reduced Renal Function: Long-term Outcome Comparisons in 23,406 CABG Patients From Ontario, Canada

OBJECTIVE

To compare the long-term outcomes of MAR versus SAR in patients with renal insufficiency.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Previous studies have been insufficiently powered to address whether MAR confers long-term benefit over SAR in patients with renal dysfunction who require CABG.

METHODS

We conducted retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada of patients who underwent isolated CABG (n = 23,406). The primary outcome was MACE, defined as the composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization. We compared patients by matching them on the propensity to have received SAR versus MAR, within groups with preoperative glomerular filtration rate (GFR) ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2; GFR between 30 and 60; and GFR <30.

RESULTS

In patients with GFR ≥60, the use of MAR versus SAR was associated with a lower rate of MACE [hazard ratio (HR) 0.87 (0.80-0.94)], and a lower rate of long-term mortality [HR 0.87 (0.79-0.97)]. In those with GFR between 30 and 60, MAR was not associated with a difference in MACE [HR 1.04 (0.87-1.26)], and a lower rate of long-term mortality [HR 0.75 (0.65-0.87)] was observed. In those with GFR <30, MAR was not associated with a difference in outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

MAR versus SAR does not correlate with a difference in MACE amongst patients with GFR between 30 and 60 and better survival raises the possibility of indication bias. Furthermore, MAR did not confer a benefit in those with severely reduced renal function. These data suggest that the potential long-term benefits of using MAR in CABG patients with renal insufficiency may be offset by competing health risks.

Patients Submitted to Myocardial Revascularization with the Use of Bilateral Internal Thoracic Arteries: Diabetics vs. Non-Diabetics

INTRODUCTION

Use of bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) as graft in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is controversial because it is related to higher in-hospital mortality, incidence of sternal wound-related infection, and an increase in surgical time. The primary objective of this study is to evaluate in-hospital mortality and mortality within 30 days from discharge. The secondary objective is to evaluate the occurrence of deep sternal wound infection in a 90-day follow-up.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of the medical records of 152 patients undergoing elective CABG with the use of BITA and cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). These patients were divided into two groups, diabetics and non-diabetics. Patients with acute myocardial infarction and concomitant valvular disease were not included in the sample.

RESULTS

Preoperative characteristics did not show significant differences between the groups, which allowed a comparative analysis. The variables electrocardiography time and aortic clamping time were higher in the diabetic group, with a significant statistical difference (P<0.0001). In-hospital mortality occurred in three patients, and there was no mortality up to 30 days in both groups. There was no significant difference in the primary end point between groups (P=0.56). Deep sternal wound infection was present in only one patient and showed no significant difference in the secondary outcome between groups (P=0.40).

CONCLUSION

We did not observe a higher mortality and occurrence of deep sternal wound infection with the use of BITA in diabetic patients compared to non-diabetics, even with greater CPB and aortic clamping times in diabetics.

Long-Term Patency Rate of Radial Artery Conduits in Chinese Patients Undergoing Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

Consensus has yet to emerge among experts as to whether the radial artery (RA) conduit was superior to the saphenous vein (SV) graft for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in terms of long-term patency. This study aimed to evaluate long-term patency of the RA conduit compared to the SV conduit for off-pump CABG, and to screen the independent predictors of long-term RA graft failure.Patients < 80 years of age with graftable triple-vessel disease undergoing non-emergent, primary, isolated off-pump CABG, using both the RA and the SV conduits, were reviewed. Graft patency, all-cause mortality and repeat revascularization were followed-up. The independent predictors of long-term RA graft failure were identified.A total of 296 out of 320 eligible patients (42 females, 61.3 ± 9.9 years old) received follow-up with an observed period of 93.4 ± 16.5 months. All-cause mortality was 14.5%, and repeat revascularization was conducted on 6 RA grafts and 9 SV grafts. Superior patency of the RA grafts compared to the SV grafts was observed (84.4% versus 78.5%, P = 0.035). Independent predictors of long-term RA graft failure included proximal stenosis of target right coronaries < 90% (OR = 2.35, 95%CI 1.41-5.82) and diabetes mellitus (OR = 1.66, 95%CI 1.17-4.26).The RA graft had a superior long-term patency than the SV graft. Long-term patency of the RA graft may be poor in diabetics or in the case of proximal stenosis of target right coronary <90%. (Trial registration: ChiCTR-OCH-1200212).

Multiarterial coronary artery bypass grafting: is the radial artery fulfilling the unkept promise of the right internal thoracic artery?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The debate on the second best conduit for CABG is still intense. In this review, we discuss the role of the radial artery and the right internal thoracic artery (RITA) compared with saphenous vein grafts (SVG).

RECENT FINDINGS

The recent RADIAL STUDY has been the first evidence based on randomized trials of a clinical benefit using a second arterial graft in CABG.On the other hand, the definitive 10-year results of the ART trial failed to show a clinical advantage associated with the use of bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA). A thorough and contextualized analysis of this and other studies, however, may offer a different perspective.

SUMMARY

Arterial conduits in CABG have shown better patency rates than SVG. Whether this leads to better clinical outcomes is still debated. In this setting, the radial artery and the RITA seem to offer a similar advantage, although with different indications and contraindications.

Bilateral internal thoracic artery versus single internal thoracic artery: a meta-analysis of propensity score-matched observational studies

The lack of benefit in terms of mid-term survival and the increase in the risk of sternal wound complications published in a recent randomized controlled trial have raised concerns about the use of bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) in myocardial revascularization surgery. For this reason, we decided to explore the current evidence available on the subject by carrying out a meta-analysis of propensity score-matched studies comparing BITA versus single internal thoracic artery (SITA). PubMed, EMBASE and Google Scholar were searched for propensity score-matched studies comparing BITA versus SITA. The generic inverse variance method was used to compute the combined hazard ratio (HR) of long-term mortality. The DerSimonian and Laird method was used to compute the combined risk ratio of 30-day mortality, deep sternal wound infection and reoperation for bleeding. Forty-five BITA versus SITA matched populations were included. Meta-analysis showed a significant benefit in terms of long-term survival in favour of the BITA group [HR 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-0.86]. These results were consistent with those obtained by a pooled analysis of the matched populations comprising patients with diabetes (HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.43-0.99). When compared with the use of SITA plus radial artery, BITA did not show any significant benefit in terms of long-term survival (HR 0.86; 95% CI 0.69-1.07). No differences between BITA and SITA groups were detected in terms of 30-day mortality or in terms of reoperation for bleeding. Compared with the SITA group, patients in the BITA group had a significantly higher risk of deep sternal wound infection (risk ratio 1.66; 95% CI 1.41-1.95) even when the pooled analysis was limited to matched populations in which BITA was harvested according to the skeletonization technique (risk ratio 1.37; 95% CI 1.04-1.79). The use of BITA provided a long-term survival benefit compared with the use of SITA at the expense of a higher risk of sternal deep wound infection. The long-term survival advantage of BITA is undetectable when compared with SITA plus radial artery.

Right internal thoracic or radial artery as the second arterial conduit for coronary artery bypass surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the available evidence on the use of the right internal thoracic artery (RITA) and the radial artery as the second arterial graft in coronary artery bypass surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

The current data support the equipoise of the two conduits in terms of clinical and angiographic outcomes. Both RITA and radial artery have better patency than saphenous vein grafts. The use of the RITA carries an increased risk of deep sternal wound infection (DSWI) if the artery is harvested as pedicle. Bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting is more technically demanding than radial artery use and there is a volume-outcome relationship in terms of mortality and incidence of DSWI. The radial artery is preferable over RITA in right-sided or distal circumflex artery targets with high-degree stenosis and in patients at higher risk for DSWI, whereas it is not recommended to graft vessels with moderate stenosis and in cases of insufficient collateralization from the ulnar artery or previous transradial procedures.

SUMMARY

The patency rate and clinical outcomes of radial artery and RITA are similar. The use of one or the other should be based on a careful evaluation of the patient's coronary anatomy and comorbidities, the conduit availability and the surgeon's and center's experience.

State-of-the-Art Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Patient Selection, Graft Selection, and Optimizing Outcomes

Despite the progressive expansion of clinical indications for percutaneous coronary intervention and the increasingly high risk profile of referred patients, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains the mainstay in multivessel disease, providing good long-term outcomes with low complication rates. Multiple arterial grafting, especially if associated with anaortic techniques, might provide the best longer-term outcomes. A surgical approach individualized to the patients' clinical and anatomic characteristics, and surgeon and team experience, are key to excellent outcomes. Current evidence regarding patient selection, indications, graft selection, and potential strategies to optimize outcomes in patients treated with CABG is summarized.

Bilateral internal thoracic arteries: what is the State of the ART?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide a broad overview of the current state of knowledge of coronary artery bypass grafting with bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA).

RECENT FINDINGS

There exists a large body of literature from mostly observational studies supporting the use of BITA in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting but selection bias is a major issue with nonrandomized data. The precise method of BITA use does not appear to impact graft patency nor clinical outcomes - in other words, BITA in any configuration appears to be protective. The major downside is the increased risk of sternal complications, which can be mitigated with sternal-sparring adjuncts. The 5-year interim results of the landmark Arterial Revascularization Trial comparing BITA versus single internal thoracic artery did not show a clinical benefit for BITA but the end-of-trial results are pending. Despite wide guideline support for BITA use, uptake in the surgical community remains low and this is likely because of technical and institutional barriers.

SUMMARY

The published literature thus far supports surgical revascularization with BITA and we eagerly await the 10-year Arterial Revascularization Trial results. The general consensus is that a greater proportion of surgical revascularization should be performed using BITA.

Optimal management of radial artery grafts in CABG: Patient and target vessel selection and anti-spasm therapy

The current literature on radial artery grafting is reviewed focusing on the optimal deployment of radial artery grafts in coronary artery bypass surgery with specific attention to the selection of patients and target vessels for radial artery grafting.

Similar Outcomes in Diabetes Patients After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting With Single Internal Thoracic Artery Plus Radial Artery Grafting and Bilateral Internal Thoracic Artery Grafting

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to determine in patients with diabetes mellitus whether single internal thoracic artery (SITA) plus radial artery (RA) grafting yields outcomes similar to those of bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) grafting.

METHODS

From January 1994 to January 2011, 1,325 diabetic patients underwent primary isolated coronary artery bypass graft surgery with either (1) SITA plus RA with or without saphenous vein (SV) grafts (n = 965) or (2) BITA with or without SV grafts (n = 360); an internal thoracic artery was used in all patients to graft the left anterior descending coronary artery. Endpoints were in-hospital outcomes and time-related mortality. Median follow-up was 7.4 years, with a total follow-up of 9,162 patient-years. Propensity score matching was performed to identify 282 well-matched pairs for adjusted comparisons.

RESULTS

Unadjusted in-hospital mortality was 0.52% for SITA plus RA with or without SV grafts and 0.28% for BITA with or without SV grafts, and prevalence of deep sternal wound infection was 3.2% and 1.7%, respectively. Unadjusted survival at 1, 5, 10, and 14 years was 97%, 88%, 68%, and 51% for SITA plus RA with or without SV grafts, and 97%, 95%, 80%, and 66% for BITA with or without SV grafts, respectively. Among propensity-matched patients, in-hospital mortality (0.35% versus 0.35%) and prevalence of deep sternal wound infection (1.4% versus 1.4%) were similar (p > 0.9) in the two groups, as was 1-, 5-, 10-, and 14-year survival: 97%, 90%, 70%, and 58% for SITA plus RA with or without SV grafting versus 97%, 93%, 79%, and 64% for BITA with or without SV grafting, respectively (early p = 0.8, late p = 0.2).

CONCLUSIONS

For diabetic patients, SITA plus RA with or without SV grafting and BITA with or without SV grafting yield similar in-hospital outcomes and long-term survival after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Therefore, both SITA plus RA and BITA plus SV grafting should be considered for these patients.

The Choice of Conduits in Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery

Coronary artery bypass grafting is the most common cardiac surgery operation performed worldwide. It is the most effective revascularization method for several categories of patients affected by coronary artery disease. Although coronary artery bypass grafting has been performed for more than 40 years, no detailed guidelines on the choice of coronary artery bypass grafting conduits have been published and the choice of the revascularization strategy remains more a matter of art than of science. Moreover, there is a clear contradiction between the proven benefits of arterial grafting and its very limited use in everyday clinical practice. In the hope of encouraging wider diffusion of arterial revascularization and to provide a guide for clinicians, we discuss current evidence for the use of different conduits in coronary artery bypass surgery and propose an evidence-based algorithm for the choice of the second conduit during coronary artery bypass operations.

Cardiac surgery 2014 reviewed

For the year 2014, more than 17,000 published references can be found in Pubmed when entering the search term "cardiac surgery". The last year has been characterized by a vivid discussion in the fields where classic cardiac surgery and modern interventional techniques overlap. Specifically, there have been important contributions in the field of coronary revascularization with either percutaneous coronary intervention or bypass surgery as well as in the fields of interventional valve therapy. Here, the US core valve trial with the first demonstration of a survival advantage at 1 year with transcatheter valves compared to surgical aortic valve replacement or the 5-year outcome of the SYNTAX trial with significant advantages for bypass surgery has been the landmark. However, in addition to these most visible publications, there have been several highly relevant and interesting contributions. This review article will summarize the most pertinent publications in the fields of coronary revascularization, surgical treatment of valve disease, heart failure (i.e., transplantation and ventricular assist devices) and aortic surgery. This condensed summary will provide the reader with "solid ground" for up-to-date decision-making in cardiac surgery.

The radial artery: a forgotten conduit

We reviewed the published literature on the clinical and angiographic outcome of radial artery (RA) grafts and on the comparison between the RA and the other conduits used in coronary operations. The RA is a better graft than the saphenous vein and comparable to the right internal thoracic artery (RITA); moreover, the RA seems a better choice than the RITA in patients at risk of sternal or pulmonary complications. We conclude that the RA should be preferred to the saphenous vein and considered at least equivalent to the RITA as the second conduit during every elective coronary artery bypass procedure.