The Pneumatic Tourniquet Technique for Endoscopic Radial Artery Harvest

Endoscopic radial artery harvesting procedure for coronary artery bypass grafting

Development and adoption of endoscopic minimally invasive saphenous vein harvesting prompted its application to the radial artery in an effort to minimize surgical trauma. Recently, we reported that endoscopic radial artery harvesting was associated with better wound appearance and it proved to be safe and effective, with less pain and fewer wound complications than the open surgical technique. Based on this positive experience, our institution adopted endoscopic radial artery harvesting, hence the aim of this manuscript is to describe the minimally invasive endoscopic radial artery harvesting for coronary artery bypass grafting.

Endoscopic versus open radial artery harvesting for coronary artery bypass grafting

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY

The radial artery has become the artery of choice after both internal thoracic arteries for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). This study compares wound healing and arm complications after endoscopic versus open radial artery harvesting.

METHODS

From January 2002 to July 2004, 509 patients underwent CABG including a radial artery conduit. Thirty-nine had endoscopic and 470 conventional open radial artery harvesting. A propensity score was used to obtain 1:3 matching of all endoscopic to 117 open-harvesting patients. Postoperative wound healing, local neurologic deficits, wound infection, and pain scores were compared.

RESULTS

Wound healing: 34 of 39 endoscopic wounds exhibited a perfect Hollander score versus 339 of 470 open-harvest wounds (p = 0.01). Wound appearance was better for endoscopic harvesting (p = 0.004). Three incomplete neurologic deficits were observed after open harvesting versus one complete neurologic deficit after endoscopic harvesting that recovered prior to hospital discharge. Incidence of wound infection was similar in both groups (p = 0.7), although infection was more severe with open harvesting. Pain score was lower (p = 0.006) with endoscopic harvesting.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic radial artery harvesting was associated with better wound appearance and less pain. Occurrence of neurologic deficits and wound infection was infrequent in both groups.

Endoscopic radial artery harvesting: patient satisfaction and complications

Endoscopic radial artery harvesting was recently introduced to reduce the morbidity associated with conventional open harvesting and improve cosmetic outcomes. From January 2004 through December 2006, 25 radial arteries were harvested endoscopically from 25 patients using the VasoView endoscopic system. Bilateral radial arteries were harvested from 6 patients by both the endoscopic and open techniques, and postoperative patient satisfaction was assessed using a visual analogue scale. Mean harvesting time was 61.9 +/- 16.0 min (range, 44-105 min), and mean harvested conduit length was 16.8 +/- 2.0 cm (range, 15-19 cm). Objective dorsal thenar numbness remained in 2 patients (8%); none complained of forearm numbness. All patients expressed marked satisfaction with the endoscopic technique and the small incision. Patient satisfaction was significantly higher with the endoscopic technique than with the open technique (visual analogue scale of 9 vs 5). Postoperative angiography revealed occlusion of a graft that had been anastomosed to a small diagonal branch. The overall graft patency was 96.6%. Endoscopic radial artery harvesting can be performed safely with infrequent complications. This method results in excellent patient satisfaction, particularly regarding the cosmetic outcome.

Patency rates of endoscopically harvested radial arteries one year after coronary artery bypass grafting

OBJECTIVES

To improve patients' acceptance of the radial artery as a graft for coronary revascularization, we introduced an endoscopic harvesting technique. The aim of this study was to assess graft quality 1 year after the operation.

METHODS

In 50 patients who underwent endoscopic radial artery harvesting for coronary artery bypass grafting, 64-slice computed tomography, electrocardiography, and echocardiography were utilized to assess graft patency and left ventricle function at a 1-year follow-up. In addition, the influencing factors of radial artery graft patency were evaluated. Radial artery patency was compared with a control group from our database.

RESULTS

Any patency of endoscopically harvested radial artery grafts was 78% (39/50) and perfect patency was 72% (36/50) 1 year after coronary revascularization. The implanting surgeon and graft harvester, patient factors, graft properties, medication, and target territory did not influence the patency rates of the radial artery graft. The only significant and strong parameter to predict perfect graft patency was the severity of the target vessel stenosis (P < .001). In patients with a target vessel stenosis of 90% or greater, radial artery graft patency was 90.3% (28/31). Patency rates of endoscopically (72%) and conventionally (74%) harvested radial arteries were not different (P = .822).

CONCLUSIONS

Patency rates 1 year after endoscopic radial artery harvesting are comparable to the open technique. On the basis of our results, we attempt to use the radial artery as a bypass graft only for target coronary arteries with 90% or greater stenosis. We recommend endoscopic harvesting as the technique of choice to harvest the radial artery.