Multi Versus Single Arterial Coronary Bypass Graft Surgery Across the Ejection Fraction Spectrum

Multiarterial vs Single-Arterial Coronary Surgery: 10-Year Follow-up of 1 Million Patients

BACKGROUND

Although many options exist for multivessel coronary revascularization, controversy persists over whether multiarterial grafting (MAG) confers a survival advantage over single-arterial grafting (SAG) with saphenous vein in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). This study sought to compare longitudinal survival between patients undergoing MAG and those undergoing SAG.

METHODS

All patients undergoing isolated CABG with ≥2 bypass grafts in The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database (2008-2019) were linked to the National Death Index. Risk adjustment was performed using inverse probability weighting and multivariable modeling. The primary end point was longitudinal survival. Subpopulation analyses were performed and volume thresholds were analyzed to determine optimal benefit.

RESULTS

A total of 1,021,632 patients underwent isolated CABG at 1108 programs (100,419 MAG [9.83%]; 920,943 SAG [90.17%]). Median follow-up was 5.30 years (range, 0-12 years). After risk adjustment, all characteristics were well balanced. At 10 years, MAG was associated with improved unadjusted (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI 0.58-0.61) and adjusted (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.85-0.88) 10-year survival. Center volume of ≥10 MAG cases/year was associated with benefit. MAG was associated with an overall survival advantage over SAG in all subgroups, including stable coronary disease, acute coronary syndrome, and acute infarction. Survival was equivalent to that with SAG for patients age ≥80 years and those with severe heart failure, renal failure, peripheral vascular disease, or obesity. Only patients with a body mass index ≥40 kg/m2 had superior survival with SAG.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiarterial CABG is associated with superior long-term survival and should be the surgical multivessel revascularization strategy of choice for patients with a body mass index of less than 40 kg/m2.

Coronary artery bypass grafting in left ventricular dysfunction: when and how

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The surgical management of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with low ejection fraction presents unique challenges that require meticulous attention to details and good surgical technique and judgement. This review details the latest evidence and best practices in the care of such patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

CABG in patients with low ejection fraction carries a significant risk of perioperative mortality and morbidity related to the development of postcardiotomy shock. Preoperative optimization with pharmacological or mechanical support is required, especially in patients with cardiogenic shock. Rapid and complete revascularization is what CABG surgeons aim to achieve. Multiple arterial revascularization should be reserved to selected patients. Off-pump CABG, on-pump breathing heart CABG, and new cardioplegic solutions remain of uncertain benefit compared with traditional CABG.

SUMMARY

Tremendous advancements in CABG allowed surgeons to offer revascularization to patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction and multivessel disease with acceptable risk. Despite that, there is a lack of comprehensive and robust studies particularly on long-term outcomes. Individualized patient assessment and a heart team approach should be used to determine the optimal surgical strategy for each patient.

Superiority of Bilateral Internal Thoracic Artery Grafting in Long-term Survival after Coronary Artery Bypass Through the Lenses of a Bedside Risk Score

BACKGROUND

Risk algorithms for the prediction of long-term survival after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) do not include the use of bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) grafting among the independent predictors.

METHODS

There were analyzed 5,666 consecutive patients who underwent isolated (n=4,715 - BITA=2,792) and combined (n=951 - BITA=246) CABG. The mean follow-up was 10.3 years (interquartile range 9.9 years). All the predictors of an existing bedside risk score (BRS) were available for analysis (age, body mass index, ejection fraction, unstable hemodynamic state, left main disease, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral arterial disease, congestive heart failure, malignant ventricular arrhythmia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes and previous heart surgery). Furthermore, a modified BRS was constructed taking into account the use of BITA grafting and combined CABG.

RESULTS

The good discriminatory ability and satisfactory calibration of the BRS was confirmed in the isolated CABG subgroup. The modified BRS showed improved discriminatory ability and similar calibration. It showed a time-varying coefficient, and accordingly, we calculated adjusted survival predictions up to 20 years after isolated and combined CABG with or without BITA grafting. Patients with BITA grafting in the low-risk quartile showed 68.4% and 65.5% predicted survival rates at 20 years in the isolated and combined CABG subgroups respectively versus 56.4% and 52.8% among patients without BITA grafting.

CONCLUSIONS

The modified BRS is a useful simplified algorithm for clinicians in choosing treatment intervention for severe isolated or combined coronary artery disease. We clearly demonstrated the superiority of BITA grafting in long-term survival throughout the entire range of the modified BRS.

Coronary artery bypass grafting in low ejection fraction: state of the art

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

As the number of patients with reduced ejection fraction secondary to ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) increases, coronary artery bypass grafting is being used with increasing frequency. In this review, we summarize the different operative considerations in this vulnerable patient population.

RECENT FINDINGS

Preoperative optimization with mechanical circulatory support devices, especially in the setting of hemodynamic instability, can reduce perioperative morbidity and mortality. The advantage of advanced techniques, such as off-pump CABG and multiple arterial grafting remains unclear. Concomitant procedures, such as ablation for atrial fibrillation remain important considerations that should be tailored to the individual patients risk profile.

SUMMARY

Despite improvements in perioperative care of patients undergoing CABG, patients with a reduced ejection fraction remain at elevated risk of major morbidity and mortality. Preoperative optimization and careful selection of intraoperative techniques can lead to improved outcomes.

Multiple arterial conduits for multi-vessel coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with mild to moderate left ventricular systolic dysfunction: a multicenter retrospective study

Background

Advantages of multiple arterial conduits for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) have been reported previously. We aimed to evaluate the mid-term outcomes of multiple arterial CABG (MABG) among patients with mild to moderate left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD).

Methods

This multicenter study using propensity score matching took place from January 2013 to June 2019 in Jiangsu Province and Shanghai, China, with a mean and maximum follow-up of 3.3 and 6.8 years, respectively. We included patients with mild to moderate LVSD, undergoing primary, isolated multi-vessel CABG with left internal thoracic artery. The in-hospital and mid-term outcomes of MABG versus conventional left internal thoracic artery supplemented by saphenous vein grafts (single arterial CABG) were compared. The primary end points were death from all causes and death from cardiovascular causes. The secondary end points were stroke, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, and a composite of all mentioned outcomes, including death from all causes (major adverse events). Sternal wound infection was included with 6 months of follow-up after surgery.

Results

243 and 676 patients were formed in MABG and single arterial CABG cohorts after matching in a 1:3 ratio. In-hospital death was not significantly different (MABG 1.6% versus single arterial CABG 2.2%, p = 0.78). After a mean (±SD) follow-up time of 3.3 ± 1.8 years, MABG was associated with lower rates of major adverse events (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.44–0.94; p = 0.019), myocardial infarction (HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.16–0.99; p = 0.045) and repeat revascularization (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.18–0.97; p = 0.034). There was no difference in the rates of death, stroke, and sternal wound infection.

Conclusions

MABG was associated with reduced mid-term rates of major adverse events and cardiovascular events and may be the procedure of choice for patients with mild to moderate LVSD requiring CABG.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13019-021-01463-5.

Application of bilateral internal mammary artery with different configurations in coronary artery bypass grafting

Background

A large number of studies have shown that BIMA grafting is superior to single internal mammary artery grafting in cardiac function protection and long-term survival after surgery. While, there is still no consensus on how is the best configuration to use BIMA. This study aims to compare intraoperative blood flow, early clinical results and early postoperative patency of different configurations of BIMA.

Methods

There were 74 patients who underwent CABGs with bilateral internal mammary artery with different configurations we included. According to the different target territories that RIMA grafted to, the patients were divided into bilateral group (group I) with 20 cases and left group (group II) with 54 cases. Intraoperative blood flow, early clinical results and early postoperative patency of different configurations of BIMA were compared.

Results

There was no difference in the early postoperative death and major complications between group I and Group II(P>0.05). Compared with the LIMA in group II, the LIMA in group I had a slightly higher DF value (76.7 ± 6.2 vs 73.1 ± 6.8, P = 0.040). Compared with the RIMA in group II, the RIMA in group I had a slightly higher MGF (51.7 ± 34.4 ml/min vs 31.4 ± 21.4 ml/min, P = 0.024). There was no difference in the other TTFM parameters of LIMA and RIMA between group I and Group II(P>0.05). Further subgroup analysis revealed that compared with free RIMA in group II, in situ RIMA had a higher DF value (71.4 ± 7.8 vs 61.8 ± 18.1,P = 0.025). The PI of LIMA in free RIMA subgroup was higher than the PI of LIMA in in-situ RIMA subgroup (3.0 ± 1.6 vs 2.1 ± 1.0,P = 0.018). The results of early postoperative CTA examination showed that all IMAs grafts were completely patent.

Conclusions

The use of BIMA for CABG is safe and efficacious, RIMA used in right coronary artery received more satisfactory graft flow. BIMA with no stenosis and occlusion in the early stage, therefore is the ideal and stable coronary bypass graft.

Outcomes following revascularization with radial artery bypass grafts: Insights from the PREVENT-IV trial

BACKGROUND

The optimal role of radial artery grafts in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains uncertain. The purpose of this study was to examine angiographic and clinical outcomes following CABG among patients who received a radial artery graft.

METHODS

Patients in the angiographic cohort of the PREVENT-IV trial were stratified based upon having received a radial artery graft or not during CABG. Baseline characteristics and 1-year angiographic and 5-year clinical outcomes were compared between patients.

RESULTS

Of 1,923 patients in the angiographic cohort of PREVENT-IV, 117 received a radial artery graft. These patients had longer surgical procedures (median 253 vs 228 minutes, P < .001) and had a greater number of grafts placed (P < .0001). Radial artery grafts had a graft-level failure rate of 23.0%, which was similar to vein grafts (25.2%) and higher than left internal mammary artery grafts (8.3%). The hazard of the composite clinical outcome of death, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization was similar for both cohorts (adjusted hazard ratio 0.896, 95% CI 0.609-1.319, P = .58). Radial graft failure rates were higher when used to bypass moderately stenotic lesions (<75% stenosis, 37% failure) compared with severely stenotic lesions (≥75% stenosis, 15% failure).

CONCLUSIONS

Radial artery grafts had early failure rates comparable to saphenous vein and higher than left internal mammary artery grafts. Use of a radial graft was not associated with a different rate of death, myocardial infarction, or postoperative revascularization. Despite the significant potential for residual confounding associated with post hoc observational analyses of clinical trial data, these findings suggest that when clinical circumstances permit, the radial artery is an acceptable alternative to saphenous vein and should be used to bypass severely stenotic target vessels.

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.

Long-term Outcomes of Multiple Arterial Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Population-Based Study of Patients in British Columbia, Canada

Importance

Although the long-term survival advantage of multiple arterial grafting (MAG) vs the standard use of left internal thoracic artery (LITA) supplemented by saphenous vein grafts (LITA+SVG) has been demonstrated in several observational studies, to our knowledge its safety and other long-term clinical benefits in a large, population-based cohort are unknown.

Objective

To compare the safety and long-term outcomes of MAG vs LITA+SVG among overall and selected subgroups of patients.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this population-based observational study, we included 20 076 adult patients with triple-vessel or left-main disease who underwent primary isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (MAG, n = 5580; LITA+SVG, n = 14 496) in the province of British Columbia, Canada, from January 2000 to December 2014, with follow-up to December 2015. We performed propensity-score analyses by weighting and matching and multivariable Cox regression to minimize treatment selection bias.

Exposures

Multiple arterial grafting or LITA+SVG.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Mortality, repeated revascularization, myocardial infarction, heart failure, and stroke.

Results

Of 5580 participants who underwent MAG, 586 (11%) were women and the mean (SD) age was 60 (8.7) years. Of 14 496 participants who underwent LITA+SVG, 2803 (19%) were women and the mean (SD) age was 68 (8.9) years. The median (interquartile range) follow-up time was 9.1 (5.1-12.6) years and 8.1 (4.5-11.7) years for the groups receiving MAG and LITA+SVG, respectively. Compared with LITA+SVG, MAG was associated with reduced mortality rates (hazard ratio [HR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.72-0.87) and repeated revascularization rates (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.66-0.84) in 15-year follow-up and reduced incidences of myocardial infarction (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47-0.85) and heart failure (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.64-0.98) in 7-year follow-up. The long-term benefits were coherent by all 3 statistical methods and persisted among patient subgroups with diabetes, obesity, moderately impaired ejection fraction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, peripheral vascular disease, or renal disease. Multiple arterial grafting was not associated with increased morbidity or mortality rates at 30 days overall or within patient subgroups.

Conclusions and Relevance

Compared with LITA+SVG, MAG is associated with reduced mortality, repeated revascularization, myocardial infarction, and heart failure among patients with multivessel disease who are undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting without increased mortality or other adverse events at 30 days. The long-term benefits consistently observed across multiple outcomes and subgroups support the consideration of MAG for a broader spectrum of patients who are undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting in routine practice.

Radial artery versus saphenous vein as the second conduit for coronary artery bypass surgery: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Individual studies may be limited by sample size to detect differences in late survival between radial artery (RA) or saphenous vein graft (SVG) as a second conduit for coronary artery bypass surgery. Here we undertook a meta-analysis of the best evidence available on the comparison of early and late clinical outcomes of the RA and the SVG.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for studies comparing use of the RA versus SVG for isolated coronary artery bypass surgery. Time-to-event outcomes for long-term mortality, repeat revascularization, and myocardial infarction (MI) were extracted as incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95%confidence intervals (95% CI). Odds ratios (OR) were extracted for perioperative mortality, stroke, and MI. A random effects meta-analysis was performed. Sensitivity analyses included leave-one-out-analyses and meta-regression.

RESULTS

Among 1201 articles, 14 studies (20,931 patients) were included (mean follow-up: 6.6 years). Operative mortality was 1.25% in the RA versus 1.33% in the SVG group (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.68-1.28). No difference in perioperative MI (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.59-1.56) or stroke (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.43-1.13) was found between RA and SVG. Long-term mortality (mean follow-up 6.6 years) was 24.5% in RA versus 34.2% in SVG group (IRR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.63-0.87, P < .001). No difference in follow-up MI or repeat revascularization was found (IRR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.42-1.36 and IRR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.42-1.09 respectively). At meta-regression, RA survival advantage was independent of age, sex, diabetes, and ventricular function.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the SVG, using the RA as the second conduit is associated with a 26% relative risk reduction in mortality at 6.6-year follow-up.

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.

The Surgical Treatment of Coronary Artery Occlusive Disease: Modern Treatment Strategies for an Age Old Problem

Coronary artery disease remains a formidable challenge to clinicians. Percutaneous interventions and surgical techniques for myocardial revascularization continue to improve. Concurrently, in light of emerging data, multiple practice guidelines have been published guiding clinicians in their therapeutic decisions. The multidisciplinary Heart Team concept needs to be embraced by all cardiovascular providers to optimize patient outcomes.