Three Arterial Grafts Improve Late Survival: A Meta-Analysis of Propensity-Matched Studies

Long-term impact of intravascular ultrasound-guidance for percutaneous coronary intervention on unprotected left main. The IMPACTUS-LM, an observational, multicentric study

INTRODUCTION

The potential benefit on long term outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) on Unprotected Left Main (ULM) driven by IntraVascular UltraSound (IVUS) remains to be defined.

METHODS

IMPACTUS LM-PCI is an observational, multicenter study that enrolled consecutive patients with ULM disease undergoing coronary angioplasty in 13 European high-volume centers from January 2002 to December 2015. Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACEs) a composite of cardiovascular (CV) death, target vessel revascularization (TVR) and myocardial infarction (MI) were the primary endpoints, while its single components along with all cause death the secondary ones.

RESULTS

627 patients with ULM disease were enrolled, 213 patients (34%) underwent IVUS-guided PCI while 414 (66%) angioguided PCI. Patients in the two cohorts had similar prevalence of risk factors except for active smoking and clinical presentation. During a median follow-up of 7.5 years, 47 (22%) patients in the IVUS group and 211 (51%) in the angio-guided group underwent the primary endpoint (HR 0.42; 95% CI [0.31-0.58] p < 0.001). After multivariate adjustment, IVUS was significantly associated with a reduced incidence of the primary endpoint (adj HR 0.39; 95% CI [0.23-0.64], p < 0.001), mainly driven by a reduction of TVR (ad HR 0.30, 95% CI [0.15-0.62], p = 0.001) and of all-cause death (adj HR 0.47, 95% CI [0.28-0.82], p = 0.008). IVUS use, age, diabetes, side branch stenosis, DES and creatinine at admission were independent predictors of MACE.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing ULM PCI, the use of IVUS was associated with a reduced risk at long-term follow-up of MACE, all-cause death and subsequent revascularization.

Long Term Survival Benefits of Different Conduits Used in Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery- A Single Institutional Practice Over 20 Years

Objective

This study determined hazard factors and long-term survival rate of total arterial coronary artery bypass graft surgery over 20 years in an extensively large, population-based cohort.

Methods

A total of 2979 patients who underwent isolated CABG from April 1999 to March 2020 were studied in 4 groups- Group-A (bilateral internal mammary artery ± radial artery), Group-B (single internal mammary artery + radial artery ± saphenous vein), Group-C (single internal mammary artery ± saphenous vein; no radial artery), and Group-D (radial artery ± saphenous vein; no internal mammary artery). The study endpoints analysed the correlation between the number and types of grafts with the survival time following isolated CABG surgery.

Results

The total arterial revascularization (Group A) group had an admirable mean long-term survival of ~19 years, compared to 18.6 years (Group B), 15.86 years (Group C), and 10.99 years (Group D). A Kaplan-Meier curve demonstrated confidence interval (CI) for study groups- (95% CI 18.33-19.94), (95% CI 18.14-19.06), (95% CI 15.40-16.32), and (95% CI 9.61-12.38) in Group A, B, C, D respectively. In the Holm-Sidak method analysis, significant associations existed between the number of arterial grafts and the long-term outcome. A statistically significant (P≤0.05) long-term survival advantage for arterial grafting was demonstrated, especially total arterial revascularisation over all other combinations except single internal mammary artery + radial artery grafting.

Conclusion

In this series, over 20 years, total arterial CABG use has excellent long-term survival, achieving complete myocardial revascularisation. There is no significant difference between the BIMA group and SIMA with radial artery. However, there is a reduced survival with decreased use of arterial conduits.

Radial artery vs right internal mammary artery as a second conduit during coronary artery bypass grafting

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical outcomes of radial artery (RA) grafts during CABG to those of right internal mammary artery (RIMA) grafts.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, single-institution cohort study of isolated CABG with multiple grafts between 2010-2022. To balance graft cohorts, propensity score matching (PSM) was performed using a 1:1 match ratio. Long-term postoperative survival was compared among RA and RIMA groups. Similarly, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) were compared among both cohorts, with MACCE comprising death, myocardial infarction (MI), coronary revascularization, and stroke. Kaplan-Meier estimation was performed for mortality, while cumulative incidence estimation was utilized for MACCE.

RESULTS

A total of 8,774 patients underwent CABG. Of those, 1,674 (19.1%) patients who underwent multiarterial CABG were included in this analysis. 326 (19.5%) patients received RA grafts and 1,348 (80.5%) received RIMA grafts. PSM yielded a cohort of 323 RA patients and 323 RIMA patients. After matching, groups were well-balanced across all baseline variables. No significant differences were observed in immediate postoperative complications or long-term survival, with 5-year survival estimates of 89.5% for the RA group vs 90.1% for the RIMA group. There was a nonsignificant trend toward a higher incidence of MACCE at 5 years in the RA group compared to the RIMA group (31.3% in the RA group vs 24.1% in the RIMA group), especially after 1-year follow-up (21.6% in the RA group vs 15.1% in the RIMA group). Specifically, for RA patients, there were higher rates of repeat revascularization in the 5-year postoperative period (14.7% in the RA group vs 5.3% in the RIMA group), particularly in the territory revascularized by the RA during the index operation (45.7% in the RA group vs 10.3% in the RIMA group).

CONCLUSION

Overall, RA and RIMA secondary conduits for CABG were associated with comparable immediate postoperative complications, 5-year MACCE, and 5-year survival after PSM. RA grafting was associated with significantly higher rates of repeat coronary revascularization at 5 years, specifically in the territory revascularized by the RA during the index operation.

The negative pressure wound therapy for prevention of sternal wound infection: Can we reduce infection rate after the use of bilateral internal thoracic arteries? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is traditionally used to treat postoperative wound infections. However, its use in closed wound sternotomy post cardiac surgery in high-risk patients has become increasingly popular. The potential preventive benefit of reducing sternal wound infections has been recently acknowledged. Bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) grafts are used in coronary artery bypass grafting but have been associated with an increased risk of sternal wound infections (SWIs).

OBJECTIVES

This systematic analysis examines whether NPWT can reduce the incidence of SWI following BIMA grafts, leading to more patients benefiting from the better survival outcome associated with BIMA grafting.

METHOD

A comprehensive systematic search and meta-analysis were performed to identify studies on the use of NPWT in closed wound sternotomy. Ovid MEDLINE (in-process and other nonindexed citations and Ovid MEDLINE 1990 to present), Ovid EMBASE (1990 to present), and The Cochrane Library (Wiley), PubMed, and Google Scholar databases were searched from their inception to May 2022 using keywords and MeSH terms. Thirty-four articles from 1991 to May 2022 were selected.

RESULT

Three studies reported on the outcome of NPWT following BIMA grafting. The pooled analysis did not show any significant difference in the incidence of sternal wound infection between NPWT and standard dressing (RR 0.48 95% CI 0.17-1.37; P = 0.17) with substantial heterogeneity (I2 65%). Another seven studies were found comparing the outcome of SWI incidence of negative pressure closed wound therapy with conventional wound therapy in patients undergoing adult cardiac surgery. The pooled analysis showed that NPWT was associated with a low risk of SWIs compared to conventional dressing (RR 0.47 95% CI 0.36-0.59; P < 0.00001), with low heterogeneity (I2 1%).

CONCLUSION

The literature identified that NPWT significantly decreased the incidence of sternal wound complications when applied to sutured sternotomy incisions in high-risk patients, and in some cases, it eliminated the risk. However, the inadequate number of randomized controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of NPWT in BIMA grafting emphasizes the need for further, robust studies.

Long-Term Outcomes of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Using an Internal Thoracic Artery versus a Radial Artery as a Second Arterial Graft

PURPOSE

To compare the outcomes of left circumflex artery (LCx) revascularization using an internal thoracic artery (ITA) or radial artery (RA) as the second arterial graft.

METHODS

Patients who underwent primary isolated coronary artery bypass grafting with left anterior descending artery revascularization using an ITA and LCx revascularization using another bilateral ITA (BITA group) or an RA (ITA-RA group) were included. All-cause mortality (primary endpoint), cardiac death, major adverse cardiac events, in-hospital death, and deep sternal wound infection (secondary endpoints) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 790 patients (BITA, n = 548 (69%); ITA-RA, n = 242 (31%)), no significant difference in all-cause mortality between the groups was observed (hazard ratio (HR): 0.87; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.67-1.12; p = 0.27) during follow-up (mean, 10 years). Multivariate analysis revealed that the BITA group exhibited significantly lower rates of long-term all-cause mortality (HR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.48-0.84; p = 0.01). In the propensity-matched cohort (n = 480, 240 pairs), significantly fewer all-cause deaths occurred in the BITA group (HR: 0.66; 95% CI 0.47-0.93; p = 0.02). There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

When used as second grafts for LCx revascularization, ITA grafts may surpass RA grafts in reducing all-cause mortality 10 years postoperatively.

Effect of Statins on All-Cause Mortality in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Propensity Score-Matched Studies

Statins are lipid-lowering medications used for the prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD), but the pleiotropic effects of statins might be beneficial in other chronic diseases. This meta-analysis investigated the association between statin use and mortality in different chronic conditions. Eligible studies were real-world studies that compared all-cause mortality over at least 12 months between propensity score-matched statin users and non-users. Overall, 54 studies were included: 21 in CVD, 6 in chronic kidney disease, 6 in chronic inflammatory diseases, 3 in cancer, and 18 in other diseases. The risk of all-cause mortality was significantly reduced in statin users (hazard ratio: 0.72, 95% confidence interval: 0.66−0.76). The reduction in mortality risk was similar in CVD studies (0.73, 0.66−0.76) and non-CVD studies (0.70, 0.67−0.79). There were no significant differences in the risk reduction between cohorts with different diseases (p = 0.179). The greatest mortality reduction was seen in studies from Asia (0.61, 0.61−0.73) and the lowest in studies from North America (0.78, 0.73−0.83) and Australia (0.78, 0.62−0.97). There was a significant heterogeneity (I2 = 95%, tau2 = 0.029, p < 0.01). In conclusion, statin use was associated with a significantly reduced risk of all-cause mortality in real-world cohorts with CVD and non-CVD.

Long-Term Patency of Venous Conduits Targeting the Right Coronary Artery System-Single Is Superior to Sequential bypass Grafting

Objective: Little is known about the fate of bypass grafts to the right coronary system. To investigate the long-term patency of venous bypass grafts directed to the right coronary artery (RCA) based on postoperative angiograms and to identify predictors of graft occlusion. Methods: In this single-center study, all patients who underwent coronary angiography from 2005 to 2021 after previously undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) were included. The primary endpoint was graft occlusion over a median follow-up of 9.1 years. Results: Among a total of 1106 patients (17.0% women, 64 (57−71) years median age), 289 (26.1%) received a sequential vein graft and 798 (72.2%) a single graft. Multivariate regression revealed age (HR 1.019, CI 95% 1.007−1.032), the urgency of CABG (HR 1.355, CI 95% 1.108−1.656), and severely impaired left ventricular function (HR 1.883, CI 95% 1.290−2.748), but not gender and chronic total occlusion (CTO) as predictive factors for graft occlusion. Single conduits were found to be a predictor of graft patency (HR 0.575 CI 95% 0.449−0.737). The angiographic outcome showed an overall 10-year freedom from graft occlusion of 73.4% ± 1.6%. The 5-year (10-year) freedom from graft occlusion was 76.9% ± 2.8% (57.8% ± 4.0%) for sequential grafts and 90.4% ± 1.1% (77.8% ± 1.7%) for single grafts (log-rank p < 0.001). Conclusions: In symptomatic patients with renewed angiography, venous bypass grafting of the RCA showed acceptable long-term patency rates. Single bypass grafting of the RCA was superior to sequential grafting, which needs to be further investigated.

Comparison of free arterial and saphenous vein grafting in outcomes after coronary bypass surgery

Objectives. The goal of this study was to examine whether the use of free arterial grafts could reduce the need for repeated revascularization and all-cause mortality in patients undergoing coronary artery grafting. Design. The cohort study included 17,354 consecutive adults with isolated coronary artery grafting from 2000 to 2016 in three cardiac surgery centers. Data were obtained from the Western Denmark Heart Registry. Propensity matching with 24 factors was used to establish comparable groups of patients receiving either vein grafts (n = 1019) or free arterial grafts (n = 1019) for outcome analysis. Results. The need for repeated revascularization and all-cause mortality was similar in both graft groups at 10 years of follow-up. Creatine-Kinase MB Isoenzyme >100 μg/L increased the risk of repeated revascularization rate after 1, 5 and 10 years. Conclusions. Long-term outcomes in revascularization and survival are comparable after free arterial or saphenous vein grafting.

Total arterial coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with preoperative anemia

OBJECTIVES

Blood transfusions after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been associated to adverse outcomes, especially in anemic patients. However, little is known about the influence of the modality of revascularization. Total arterial revascularization (TAR) was shown to reduce postoperative transfusion when compared to saphenous vein-based (SV)-CABG (LIMA plus one/more SV grafts). We, therefore, aimed to investigate the impact of TAR-CABG versus SV-CABG on blood products use and perioperative outcomes in patients with preoperative anemia, normally at higher risk for postoperative transfusions.

METHODS

From a cohort of 936 patients with mild preoperative anemia undergoing primary elective on-pump CABG, 166 matched pairs of patients undergoing either TAR- or SV-CABG were obtained. Anemia was defined as hemoglobin level <13 g/dl for men and <12 g/dl for women. The primary endpoint was the evaluation of red packed cells (RPC) use over the entire hospital stay.

RESULTS

TAR patients showed significantly reduced RPC usage compared with SV (mean difference 0.45 units). TAR patients had a reduced intubation time (mean difference 7.6 h) and were discharged 1.24 days earlier than SV patients. Pneumonia and acute kidney injury were doubled among SV patients. Adjusted regression showed that TAR technique is a predictor of reduced RPC unit use regardless of age and EuroSCORE II (odds ratio: 0.63, p < .01).

CONCLUSION

Patients with preoperative anemia might benefit from TAR regardless of age or calculated operative risk. TAR-CABG was associated to reduced postoperative use of blood products and postoperative length of stay in comparison with SV-CABG in this subset of patients.

Contemporary coronary artery bypass graft surgery and subsequent percutaneous revascularization

Patients who have undergone coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery are susceptible to bypass graft failure and progression of native coronary artery disease. Although the saphenous vein graft (SVG) was traditionally the most-used conduit, arterial grafts (including the left and right internal thoracic arteries and the radial artery) have improved patency rates. However, the need for secondary revascularization remains common, and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has become the most common modality of secondary revascularization after CABG surgery. Procedural characteristics and clinical outcomes differ considerably from those associated with PCI in patients without previous CABG surgery, owing to altered coronary anatomy and differences in conduit pathophysiology. In particular, SVG PCI carries an increased risk of complications, and operators are shifting their focus towards embolic protection strategies and complex native-vessel interventions, increasingly using SVGs as conduits to facilitate native-vessel PCI rather than pursuing SVG PCI. In this Review, we discuss the differences in conduit pathophysiology, changes in CABG surgery techniques, and the latest evidence in terms of PCI in patients with previous CABG surgery, with a particular emphasis on safety and long-term efficacy. We explore the subject of contemporary CABG surgery and subsequent percutaneous revascularization in this complex patient population.

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.

2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The guideline for coronary artery revascularization replaces the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines, providing a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered. Structure: Coronary artery disease remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Coronary revascularization is an important therapeutic option when managing patients with coronary artery disease. The 2021 coronary artery revascularization guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with coronary artery disease who are being considered for coronary revascularization, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests.

2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The guideline for coronary artery revascularization replaces the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines, providing a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered.

STRUCTURE

Coronary artery disease remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Coronary revascularization is an important therapeutic option when managing patients with coronary artery disease. The 2021 coronary artery revascularization guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with coronary artery disease who are being considered for coronary revascularization, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests.

Single or multiple arterial bypass graft surgery vs. percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease

AIM

The aim of this study was to compare long-term all-cause mortality between patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) using multiple (MAG) or single arterial grafting (SAG).

METHODS AND RESULTS

The current study is a post hoc analysis of the SYNTAX Extended Survival Study, which compared PCI with CABG in patients with three-vessel (3VD) and/or left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) and evaluated survival with ≥10 years of follow-up. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality at maximum follow-up (median 11.9 years) assessed in the as-treated population. Of the 1743 patients, 901 (51.7%) underwent PCI, 532 (30.5%) received SAG, and 310 (17.8%) had MAG. At maximum follow-up, all-cause death occurred in 305 (33.9%), 175 (32.9%), and 70 (22.6%) patients in the PCI, SAG, and MAG groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Multiple arterial grafting [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49-0.89], but not SAG (adjusted HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.67-1.03), was associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality compared with PCI. In patients with 3VD, both MAG (adjusted HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.37-0.81) and SAG (adjusted HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50-0.91) were associated with significantly lower mortality than PCI, whereas in LMCAD patients, no significant differences between PCI and MAG (adjusted HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.56-1.46) or SAG (adjusted HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.81-1.53) were observed. In patients with revascularization of all three major myocardial territories, a positive correlation was observed between the number of myocardial territories receiving arterial grafts and survival (Ptrend = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that MAG might be the more desirable configuration for CABG to achieve lower long-term all-cause mortality than PCI in patients with 3VD and/or LMCAD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered on clinicaltrial.gov. SYNTAXES: NCT03417050 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03417050); SYNTAX: NCT00114972 (https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00114972).

Multiarterial coronary grafting using the radial artery as a second arterial graft: how far does the survival benefit extend?

OBJECTIVES

Despite the 10-year results of the Arterial Revascularization Trial, the controversy regarding the survival benefit of multiarterial grafting (MAG) remains. Our goal was to present our long-term survival data in this propensity-matched observational study.

METHODS

A primary unmatched population of 4303 patients with first-time isolated coronary artery bypass grafts operated on between 2000 and 2018 were included. A total of 1187 post-matched patients were compared with matched controls. Multivariate logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard analyses were undertaken to assess the contribution of MAG and other covariates to the long-term survival of unmatched and propensity-matched populations.

RESULTS

MAG was associated with increased median survival in both the unmatched and the matched groups; difference: 962 and 1459 days, log-rank tests; P = 0.029 and 0.0004, respectively. MAG was associated with a reduced hazard of death in the unmatched as well as in the matched groups: hazard ratio [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.72 (0.62-0.83); P < 0.0001 and 0.75 (0.64-0.88); P ≤ 0.0001, respectively. In the matched group, the prosurvival factors were low logistic EuroSCORE, obesity, no intra-aortic balloon pump, an ejection fraction >30%, age 50-69 years, operation by an experienced surgeon, with and without diabetes, on-pump surgery and 3 distal anastomoses. In a cohort of 242 late-presenting patients with reinfarction or recurrent angina, both MAG and control populations were associated with reduced median survival; median (95% CI): MAG: 3026 (1138-3503); control: 3035 (2134-3991), log-rank P = 0.217 with superior patency of the left internal mammary artery but no difference between radial artery and saphenous vein grafts.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiarterial revascularization, especially using the radial artery as a second arterial conduit, is associated with a significant survival benefit and a lack of in-hospital morbidity.

Multiple versus single arterial grafting in the elderly: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity score studies

INTRODUCTION

The benefit of adding a second arterial conduit is still controversial, mainly in specific subgroups. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity score (PS) studies comparing survival and early results in elderly patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with multiple (MAG) versus single arterial grafting (SAG).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

MEDLINE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were used to find relevant literature (1960-April 2020). Survival at a ≥ 1-year follow-up and early outcomes were evaluated. Outcomes were collected from matched samples or PS adjusted analysis: hazard ratio (HR) along with their variance, frequencies or odds ratios. Random effect models were used to compute combined statistical measures and 95% confidence intervals (CI) through generic inverse variance method (time-to-event) or Mantel-Haenszel method (binary events).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Eleven PS cohorts and 1 RCT comprising > 18,800 patients older than 70 (>6200 MAG and >12,500 SAG) were included in this meta-analysis. MAG was associated with lower long-term mortality (pooled HR: 0.81, 95%CI: 0.72-0.91, p<0.01, I2=64%) in the absence of higher risk of early mortality (pooled OR: 0.74, 95%CI: 0.44 to 1.25, p=0.27, I2=0%). In a meta-regression, MAG survival advantage was more pronounced in studies with a higher MAG usage rate (β = -0.0052, p=0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests that advanced age should not limit MAG's use considering its benefits in long-term survival. Of note, an individualized patient selection for this approach is warranted.

Survival effect of radial artery usage in addition to bilateral internal thoracic arterial grafting: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Little evidence shows whether the radial artery (RA) as third arterial graft provides superior outcomes compared with the use of the bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) and saphenous vein (SV) graft in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. A meta-analysis of propensity score-matched observational studies that compared the long-term outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting with the use of BITA and the RA (BITA + RA) versus BITA and SV (BITA + SV) was performed.

METHODS

Electronic databases from January 2000 to November 2020 were screened. Studies that reported long-term mortality were analyzed. The primary outcome was long-term overall mortality. A secondary end point was in-hospital/30-day mortality. Pooled hazard ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for survival and time-to-event analysis according to a random effect model. Differences were expressed as odds ratio with 95% CI for in-hospital/30-day mortality.

RESULTS

Six propensity score-matched studies that reported on 2500 matched patients (BITA + RA: 1250; BITA + SV: 1250) were identified for comparison. The use of BITA + RA was not statistically associated with early mortality (odds ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.36-2.28; P = .83). The mean follow-up time ranged from 7.5 to 12 years. The pooled analysis of long-term survival revealed a significant difference between the 2 groups favoring BITA + RA treatment (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.50-0.91; P = .031). The survival rate for BITA + RA versus BITA + SV at 5, 10, and 15 years were: 96.2% versus 94.8%, 88.9% versus 87.4%, and 83% versus 77.9%, respectively (log rank test, P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with coronary artery bypass grafting, BITA + RA usage is not associated with higher rates of operative risk and is associated with superior long-term overall survival.

Comparative Analysis Following Implementation of Two Types of Y-Composite Multiarterial Revascularization Strategies at a Single Academic Institution

Background

We compared early outcomes, at a single academic institution, of implementing full coronary revascularization in coronary artery bypass grafting using multiarterial Y‐composite grafts with multiple sequential anastomoses.

Methods and Results

Clinical records of 425 consecutive patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting using Y‐grafting with left internal mammary artery and radial artery (Y‐RA group) or right internal mammary artery (Y‐RIMA group) from 2015 to 2019, were reviewed. These were compared with the institutional experience of isolated coronary artery bypass grafting cases (in situ on pump/off pump) for the same period of time. When comparing the 4 groups, the Y‐RIMA/RA groups revealed a higher number of distal anastomosis than the in situ on‐ or off‐pump groups. When the number of distal arterial anastomosis was analyzed, there was a superiority of using the Y‐configuration compared with the in situ approach. Moreover, there were no significant differences among groups for mortality and/or major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events in hospital or at 30‐day follow‐up. A subanalysis comparing the Y‐RIMA group with the Y‐RA group showed that complementary grafts to the Y‐construct were required to accomplish full revascularization more frequently in the Y‐RIMA group. Full‐arterial revascularization was achieved in 92.2% of the Y‐RA group and 72.0% of the Y‐RIMA group (P<0.001). In 82.8% of the Y‐RA group and 30.8% of the Y‐RIMA group, revascularization was completed as an anaortic procedure (P<0.001).

Conclusions

The 2 types of arterial Y‐composite grafting were able to be introduced in the routine practice of our institution showing comparable results to the established institutional practice. This procedure allowed for more arterial distal anastomosis to be performed safely without compromising outcomes.

Survival outcomes and adverse events in patients with chronic kidney disease after coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention: a meta-analysis of propensity score-matching studies

BACKGROUND

The present meta-analysis of propensity score-matching studies aimed to compare the long-term survival outcomes and adverse events associated with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD).

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for studies comparing CABG and PCI in patients with CKD. The search period extended to 13 February 2021. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and the secondary endpoints included myocardial infarction, revascularization, and stroke. Odds ratios (ORs) and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to express the pooled effect. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies involving 18,005 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Long-term mortality risk was significantly lower in the CABG group than in the PCI group (HR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.70-0.83, p < .001), and similar results were observed in the subgroup analysis of patients undergoing dialysis and for different estimated glomerular filtration rate ranges. The incidence rates of myocardial infarction (OR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.12-0.54, p < .001) and revascularization (OR: 0.17, 95% CI: 0.08-0.35, p < .001) were lower in the CABG group than in the PCI group, although there were no significant differences in the incidence of stroke between the two groups (OR: 1.24; 95% CI: 0.89-1.73, p > .05). Subgroup analysis among patients on dialysis yielded similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

Our propensity score matching analysis revealed that, based on long-term follow-up outcomes, CABG remains superior to PCI in patients with CKD.

Prediction value of EuroSCORE II in total arterial revascularization and its usage in the evaluation of postoperative complications: Single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Total arterial revascularization is the most durable and technically the most demanding type of coronary artery bypass grafting procedure. It has proven long-term supremacy in comparison to conventional coronary artery bypass grafting. In our study, we investigated the reliability of EuroSCORE II as a predictor of intrahospital death. We showed its impact on adverse perioperative events.

METHODS

In this nonrandomized prospective study, we analyzed 116 consecutive patients who underwent the total arterial revascularization procedure at our Institute from January 2011 until the present. For myocardial revascularization, the most suitable combinations with left internal mammary artery, right internal mammary artery, and radial artery grafts were used. Main fact in this research was intrahospital mortality value in comparison with the value predicted.

RESULTS

There were 104 (89.7%) males and 12 (10.3%) females. Mean preoperative EuroSCORE II prediction value was 1.98% and postoperative we obtained 1.72%. Postoperative redo for bleeding was 6%. Positive correlation was proven between the EuoroSCORE II value and intensive care unit stay (0.452; p < 0.001). Among patients who received two internal mammary arteries, the highest EuroSCORE II was among those with presternal wound infection (p = 0.005). Patients with bilateral internal mammary arteries and diabetes showed that they have the highest values of EuroSCORE II and, at the same time, that they are extremely prone to wound problems.

CONCLUSIONS

We achieved a lower intrahospital mortality level than it was predicted with preoperative EuroSCORE II value. This tool is a reliable method for preoperative death risk calculation in this group of patients.

Does the Addition of a Gastroepiploic Artery to Bilateral Internal Thoracic Artery Improve Survival?

It is unclear whether the additional conduit to supplement bilateral internal thoracic arteries (BITA) influences the patient outcome in coronary surgery. This retrospective study compared long-term survival of patients undergoing left-sided BITA grafting in which the third conduit to the right coronary system (RCA) was either vein graft (SVG) or gastroepiploic artery (GEA). From 1989 to 2014, 1432 consecutive patients underwent left-sided revascularization with BITA associated with SVG (n = 599) or GEA (n = 833) to RCA. Propensity score was calculated by logistic regression model and patients were matched 1 to 1 leading to 2 groups of 320 matched patients. The primary end point was the overall mortality from any cause. GEA was used in significantly lower risk patients. The 30-day mortality was 1.6% without influence of the graft configuration. Postoperative follow-up was 13.6 ± 6.6 years and was 94% complete. The significant difference in patients' survival observed at 20 years in favor of GEA in unmatched groups (48 ± 4% vs 33 ± 6%, P < 0.001) was not confirmed in matched groups (41 ± 7% vs 36 ± 7%, P = 0.112). In multivariable Cox model analysis, the conduit used to RCA did not influence the long-term survival in matched groups, like no other graft configuration or operative parameter. Only complete revascularization remained predictor of survival (P = 0.016), with age (P < 0.0001), diabetes status (P = 0.007), and left ventricle ejection fraction (P < 0.0001). Long-term survival in patients undergoing BITA grafting is not affected by using GEA as third arterial conduit in alternative to SVG. Further studies are necessary to assess its impact on long-term cardiac events.

Differences in Long-term Outcomes After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Using Single vs Multiple Arterial Grafts and the Association With Sex

IMPORTANCE

Sex-related differences in the outcome of using multiple arterial grafts during coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remain uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcomes of the use of multiple arterial grafts vs a single arterial graft during CABG for women and men.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This statewide cohort study used data from New York's Cardiac Surgery Reporting System and New York's Vital Statistics file on 63 402 patients undergoing CABG from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2014. Statistical analysis was performed from January 10 to August 20, 2020.

EXPOSURES

Multiple arterial grafting or single arterial grafting.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Mortality, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke, repeated revascularization, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (composite of mortality, AMI, and stroke), and major adverse cardiac event (composite of mortality, AMI, or repeated revascularization) were compared among propensity-matched patients and stratified by the risk of long-term mortality.

RESULTS

Of the 63 402 patients (48 155 men [76.0%]; mean [SD] age, 69.9 [10.5] years) in the study, women had worse baseline characteristics than men for most of the explored variables. Propensity matching yielded a total of 9512 male pairs and 1860 female pairs. At 7 years of follow-up, mortality was lower among men who underwent multiple arterial grafting (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.73-0.87) but not women who underwent multiple arterial grafting (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.84-1.15). When stratified by the estimated risk of death, the use of multiple arterial grafts was associated with better survival and a lower rate of a major adverse cardiac event among low-risk, but not high-risk, patients of both sexes, and the risk cutoff was different for men and women.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study suggests that women have a worse preoperative risk profile than men. Multiple arterial grafting is associated with better outcomes among low-risk, but not high-risk, patients, and the risk cutoffs differ between sexes. These data highlight the need for new studies on the outcome of multiple arterial grafts in women.

What is the best graft to supplement the bilateral internal thoracic artery to the left coronary system? A meta-analysis

This meta-analysis was designed to assess the effect of the use of arterial conduits (ACs) versus great saphenous vein (GSV) grafts as a third conduit for revascularization of the right coronary artery system, in addition to the bilateral internal mammary artery on the left coronary artery. PubMed and OVID's version of MEDLINE were searched from January 2000 to September 2017 for relevant publications. The primary end point was the long-term mortality rate. The secondary end point was early mortality, defined as either in-hospital death or death within 30 days after the operation. Meta-regression was used to evaluate the effect of female gender and diabetes on the primary and secondary outcomes. A total of 10 studies (4121 patients) were selected for the systematic review and meta-analysis comparing ACs (1619) versus the GSV (2502), 6 (2548) comparing the GSV (2548) versus the right gastroepiploic artery (1023) and 5 comparing the GSV (2548) versus the radial artery (596). The pooled analysis did not show any difference between ACs and the GSV in terms of long-term mortality rates [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.56-1.01; P = 0.061]. When using the leave-one-out analysis, after the exclusion of 1 study (outlier), ACs were significantly associated with lower long-term mortality rates (HR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.54-0.83; P < 0.001). When the results were stratified according to the type of study, no differences with regard to long-term results were found between ACs and the GSV, either in the pooled analysis of the 6 propensity score-matched studies (HR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.43-1.08; P = 0.107) or in the pooled analysis of the 4 non-propensity score-matched studies (HR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.62-1.23; P = 0.438). Again, when the outlier was excluded, the pooled analysis of the propensity score-matched studies confirmed that ACs were associated with lower long-term mortality rates (HR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.43-0.80; P < 0.001). Comparisons between the GSV and either the right gastroepiploic artery or the radial artery showed similar results. No publication bias was found. This meta-analysis is the first to compare the GSV to the radial artery and the right gastroepiploic artery for right coronary artery grafting in patients receiving a bilateral internal mammary artery to left coronary artery. The choice of a third AC seems to be preferable in order to achieve better long-term survival.

Short-Term Risk of Bilateral Internal Mammary Artery Grafting in Diabetic Patients

This study compares the morbidity and mortality at 30 days following the use of bilateral internal mammary arteries (BIMA) vs a single internal mammary artery (SIMA) at the time of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with a preoperative HbA1c. Patients undergoing CABG from January 2008 to December 2016 reported to the Society of Thoracic Surgeons database were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into 2 groups: use of BIMA or use of SIMA and propensity matched. To assess the effect of preoperative HbA1c, both groups were further divided into 5 subgroups: patients without diabetes mellitus (DM), or patients with DM and a preoperative HbA1c level in one of four groups (< 7%, 7-9%, 9-11%, or >11%). The postoperative outcomes in both the BIMA and SIMA groups were compared. There were 700,504 and 28,115 patients with measured preoperative HbA1c levels in the SIMA and BIMA groups, respectively. Propensity score matching identified 23,635 comparable patients in each group for analysis. There was no difference in postoperative mortality between the BIMA and SIMA groups (1.3% vs 1.2%). The incidences of sternal wound infection (SWI) in patients undergoing placement of BIMA vs SIMA were: 0.8% vs 0.4% with no DM (P < 0.0001), 1.9% vs 1.0% with HbA1c < 7% (P < 0.001), 2.4% vs 1.2% with HbA1c 7-9% (P < 0.001), 2.8% vs 1.4% with HbA1c 9-11% (P = 0.02), 4.1% vs 1.5% with HbA1c > 11% (P = 0.01). Based on the incidence of SWI, BIMA is a reasonable approach with an HbA1c<7%.

RARAY Operation: Operative Description and Early Results for Achieving Total Arterial Coronary Revascularisation

BACKGROUND

Total arterial revascularisation may prolong postoperative survival following coronary surgery due to avoidance of late saphenous vein graft (SVG) failure leading to ischaemic cardiac events. The left internal mammary artery (LIMA) is routinely used for CABG but harvest may adversely affect lung function and reduce sternal vascular supply. Early experience of a novel reconstruction with exclusive reliance on two radial arteries (RA) joined as a Y graft (RARAY) is presented.

METHODS

One RA is anastomosed to the ascending aorta and used to revascularise the left anterior descending artery coronary territory; and a second RA is joined to the first 4-6 cm from the origin, approximating the lateral border of the pulmonary artery and used to revascularise the circumflex and right coronary territories. No LIMA is used. The radial artery was harvested open with diathermy and metal clips and since 2008, all patients received intravenous vasoconstrictors from the commencement of the anaesthetic.

RESULTS

From 2002 to 2019, 28 patients underwent RARAY for specific indications of prior use or reasons to avoid LIMA harvest, preservation of lung function, minimisation of bleeding risk from antiplatelet agents and extra length of RA to graft distal coronary targets beyond usual reach for LIMA. There was no RA spasm, no in-hospital death and no patient returned with symptoms of angina.

CONCLUSIONS

The early experience of the RARAY operation for three coronary territory revascularisations are satisfactory.

Multi-arterial and total-arterial coronary revascularization: Past, present, and future perspective

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY

Although abundant biological, clinical, and scientific evidence exists on the superiority of multi-arterial (MAR) and total-arterial revascularization (TAR) over the conventional strategy with a single internal thoracic artery, only 10% of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in the United States receives a second arterial conduit, and only 5% of patients receives TAR.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In January 2020, the authors performed comprehensive search to identify studies that evaluated MAR and TAR strategies through the MEDLINE database.

CONCLUSIONS

In this paper, the authors reviewed the literature on the historical and current evidence in favor of MAR and TAR, thus underlying why current CABG practice needs qualitative improvement.

Total arterial off-pump coronary revascularization: The Holy Grail?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains the standard of care for patients with complex multivessel coronary artery disease. However, conventional CABG utilizing left internal mammary artery and supplemental vein grafts performed on cardiopulmonary bypass is marred by questionable long-term patency of vein grafts and risk of neurological injury. Total arterial off-pump CABG is a strategy associated with avoidance of neurological injury and vein graft failure. The aim of this review is to summarize recent evidence on safety and effectiveness of total arterial off-pump CABG.

RECENT FINDINGS

Two key studies have been published recently. One describes a dual inflow technique that achieves anaortic, off-pump complete revascularization using arterial grafts only. The other is single centre study that reports 10-year survival of 89.33%, rate of freedom from repeat revascularization of 91.33% and early stroke rate of 0.9% after total arterial off-pump CABG.

SUMMARY

Total arterial off-pump CABG with its advantages of improved survival, enhanced freedom from repeat revascularization and low stroke rate can be regarded as the Holy Grail of myocardial revascularization. However, the results of a large, multicenter, prospective trial are required to substantiate this status.

The Year in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia: Selected Highlights from 2019

This highlights in our specialty for 2019 begin with the ongoing major developments in transcatheter valve interventions. Thereafter, the advances in left ventricular assist devices are reviewed. The recent focus on conduit selection and robotic options in coronary artery bypass surgery are then explored. Finally, this special articles closes with a discussion of pulmonary hypertension in noncardiac surgery, anesthetic technique in cardiac surgery, as well as postoperative pneumonia and its outcome consequences.

A comparative review of the outcomes of using arterial versus venous conduits in coronary artery bypass graft (CABG)

Nowadays one of the most frequent reasons of death in the world is coronary artery disease. CABG is a portion of a common revascularization mediation that is done to supervise CAD by applying vessels that are grafted to revascularize vessels distal from the blockage. Different sources of grafts are included veins (specifically saphenous) and arteries (include mammary and radial arteries). Multiple conduits are used to this end, but the most suitable is left internal mammary artery (LIMA) to the left anterior descending artery (LAD) as a golden standard. Saphenous vein grafts were the guiding approach applied by the vast majority of cardiac surgeons in the 1970s, even though all approaches were supported by doctors. Although the radial artery graft was introduced simultaneously, this approach due to its complications was not as prevalent. This article is aimed to define the pros and cons of applying each kind of grafts according to the results furnished by existent studies. It has also examined the benefits provided by total arterial coronary artery bypass graft against CABG including venous graft for patients with CAD from the perspective of surgeons.

The ROMA trial: why it is needed

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We herein summarize the current evidence on the clinical outcome associated with the use of single and multiple arterial grafts for coronary bypass surgery and the role and importance of the Randomized comparison of the clinical Outcome of single versus Multiple Arterial grafts (ROMA) trial.

RECENT FINDINGS

Observational evidence suggests that the use of multiple arterial grafts is associated with better clinical outcomes compared to the use of a single arterial graft. Randomized evidence is inconclusive; the 5-year interim analysis of the largest randomized trial on the topic did not show any clinical benefit associated with the use of bilateral versus single internal thoracic arteries, whereas a pooled analysis of the trials comparing the radial artery and the saphenous vein as a second graft showed a significant reduction in follow-up cardiac events using the radial artery. Hidden confounders and treatment allocation biases as well as methodological flaws are the most likely explanation of this contradiction.

SUMMARY

ROMA was conceived based on the lessons learned from a critical analysis of the existing randomized and observational evidence with the aim to provide a definitive answer to the question of the potential clinical benefit of multiple arterial grafts for coronary bypass.

Arterial Grafts for Coronary Bypass

Observational and randomized evidence shows that arterial grafts have better patency rates than saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) in coronary artery bypass grafting. Observational studies suggest that the use of multiple arterial grafts is associated with longer postoperative survival, but this must be interpreted in the context of treatment allocation bias and hidden confounders intrinsic to the study designs. Recently, a pooled analysis of 6 randomized trials comparing the radial artery with the SVG as the second conduit and the largest randomized trial comparing the use of single and bilateral internal thoracic arteries have provided apparently divergent results about a clinical benefit with the use of >1 arterial conduit. However, both analyses have methodological limitations that may have influenced their results. At present, it is unclear whether the well-documented increased patency rate of arterial grafts translates into clinical benefits in the majority of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. A large randomized trial testing the arterial grafts hypothesis (ROMA [Randomized Comparison of the Clinical Outcome of Single Versus Multiple Arterial Grafts]) is underway and will report the results in a few years.

Multiple Arterial Grafting Is Associated With Better Outcomes for Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Patients

BACKGROUND

Observational studies have shown better survival in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with 2 arterial grafts compared with 1. However, whether a third arterial graft is associated with incremental benefit remains uncertain. We sought to analyze the outcomes of 3 versus 2 arterial grafts during CABG. As a secondary objective, we compared CABG with 2 or 3 arterial grafts (multiple arterial grafts [MAG]) with CABG using a single arterial graft (SAG).

METHODS

Retrospective cohort analyses of all patients undergoing primary isolated CABG in Ontario, Canada, from October 2008 to March 2016. Propensity score matching was performed between patients with 3 arterial grafts (3Art group) versus 2 (2Art group). The primary outcome was time to first event of a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and repeat revascularization (major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events). Additional analyses were performed to evaluate the association between MAG versus SAG and long-term outcomes using propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Fifty thousand, two hundred thirty patients underwent isolated CABG during our study period; 3044 (6.1%) and 8253 (16.4%) patients had 3 and 2 arterial grafts, respectively, resulting in 2789 propensity score matching pairs for the primary analyses. Mean and maximum follow-up was 4.2 and 8.5 years, respectively. Radial artery grafting was more common in the 3Art versus 2Art group (79.3% versus 65.6%, P<0.01). In-hospital outcomes were not significantly different, including death (3Art 0.8% versus 2Art 0.5%, P=0.26). Up to 8 years, there were no differences in major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (3Art 27%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 24% to 30% versus 2Art 25%, 95% CI, 22% to 28%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.08, 95% CI, 0.94-1.25), death (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.90-1.29), myocardial infarction (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.87-1.51), stroke (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.95-2.06), or repeat revascularization (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.82-1.32). When evaluating MAG versus SAG, 8629 patient pairs were formed using propensity score matching. At 8 years, cumulative incidences of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (HR, 0.82, 95% CI, 0.77-0.88), survival (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.73-0.88), repeat revascularization (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.69-0.90), and myocardial infarction (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.72-0.97) were superior in the MAG group.

CONCLUSIONS

CABG with 3 arterial grafts was not associated with increased in-hospital death nor with better clinical outcomes at 8-year follow-up, compared with CABG with 2 arterial grafts. MAG was associated with superior outcomes compared with SAG.

Total arterial revascularization strategies: A meta-analysis of propensity score-matched observational studies

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY

We explored the current evidence available on total arterial revascularization (TAR) carrying out a meta-analysis of propensity score-matched studies comparing TAR versus non-TAR strategy.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched for propensity score-matched studies comparing TAR vs non-TAR. The generic inverse variance method was used to compute the combined hazard ratio (HR) of long-term mortality. The Der-Simonian and Laird method were used to compute the combined risk ratio (RR) of 30-day mortality, deep sternal wound infection, and reoperation for bleeding.

RESULTS

Eighteen TAR vs non-TAR matched populations were included. Meta-analysis showed a significant benefit in terms of long-term survival of the TAR group over the non-TAR group (HR: 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.68-0.78). Better long-term survival over non-TAR strategy was confirmed by both subgroups: TAR with the bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) and TAR without BIMA. Meta-regression suggests that TAR may offer a higher protective survival effect in diabetic patients (coefficient: -0.0063; 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.0006), when carried out with BIMA (coefficient: -0.15; 95% CI: -0.27 to -0.03) or using three arterial conduits (coefficient: -0.12; 95% CI: -0.25 to 0.007). A TAR strategy carried out using BIMA, differently from TAR without BIMA, increases the risk of deep sternal infection (RR: 1.44; 95% CI: 1.17-1.77).

CONCLUSIONS

TAR provides a long-term survival benefit compared with the non-TAR strategy. Also, compared with TAR without BIMA, TAR with BIMA may offer a higher protective long-term survival effect at the expense of a higher risk of sternal deep wound infection.