Outcomes of total arterial revascularization vs conventional revascularization in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: A narrative review of major studies

A Single-Surgeon Experience Transitioning to Total Arterial Revascularization

Background: Coronary artery bypass grafting remains the standard of care for advanced and multifocal coronary artery disease; however, for patients that are surgical candidates, total arterial revascularization (TAR) remains underutilized due to concerns such as sternal wound infections and the learning curve. We present the results of a large cohort of mid-career surgeons transitioning to TAR, focusing on short-term outcomes and the learning curve. Methods: The surgeons transitioned to using TAR as the preferred revascularization technique in August of 2017. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons database was reviewed to identify all patients who underwent isolated non-emergent CABG performed by a single surgeon from January 2014 through January 2022. Patients were divided into two groups-those who had TAR and those who had traditional CABG using one internal mammary artery and vein grafts (IMA-SVG). Results: Eight hundred ninety-eight patients meet inclusion criteria (458 IMA-SVG and 440 TAR). The TAR group had slightly longer cardiopulmonary bypass time, cross clamp times, and operative times (all p < 0.05); however, ICU stay was shorter and 30-day readmission rate was lower for TAR compared to IMA-SVG (all p < 0.05). The TAR group also required fewer postoperative transfusions (p = 0.005). There was no difference in prolonged intubation, stroke, length of stay, mortality, or sternal wound complications between groups (all p > 0.05). The average TAR was 30 min longer; however, learning curves, stratified by number of grafts placed, showed no significant learning curve associated with TAR. Conclusions: An experienced surgeon transitioning from IMA-SVG to TAR slightly increases operative time, but decreases ICU stay, readmissions, and postoperative transfusions with no significant difference in rates of immediate post-operative complications or 30-day mortality, with a minimal learning curve.

Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery: Evidence-Based Practice

Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery remains a pivotal cornerstone, offering established symptomatic alleviation and prognostic advantages for patients grappling with complex multivessel and left main coronary artery diseases. Despite the lucid guidance laid out by contemporary guidelines regarding the choice between CABG and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), a notable hesitation persists among certain patients, characterized by psychological reservations, knowledge gaps, or individual beliefs that sway their inclination toward surgical intervention. This comprehensive review critically synthesizes the prevailing guidelines, modern practices, and outcomes pertaining to CABG surgery, delving into an array of techniques and advancements poised to enhance both short-term and enduring surgical outcomes. The exploration encompasses advances in on-pump and off-pump procedures, conduit selection strategies encompassing the bilateral utilization of internal mammary artery and radial artery conduits, meticulous graft evaluation methodologies, and the panorama of minimally invasive approaches, including those assisted by robotic technology. Furthermore, the review navigates the terrain of hybrid coronary revascularization, shedding light on the pivotal roles of shared decision-making and the heart team in shaping treatment pathways. As a comprehensive compendium, this review not only navigates the intricate landscape of CABG surgery but also aligns it with contemporary practices, envisioning its trajectory within the evolving currents of healthcare dynamics.