Rationale and design of a multicenter randomized trial to compare the graft patency between no-touch vein harvesting technique and conventional approach in coronary artery bypass graft surgery

Quantitative flow ratio and graft outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting surgery: A retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel noninvasive tool for the functional assessment of coronary stenosis. Whether or not QFR could predict graft outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting procedure is unknown. This study aimed to investigate the association of QFR value with graft outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting surgery.

METHODS

The QFR values were retrospectively obtained from patients receiving coronary artery bypass grafting surgery from 2017 to 2019 in the Graft Patency Between No-Touch Vein Harvesting Technique and Conventional Approach in Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery (PATENCY) trial. QFR calculation was conducted in eligible coronary arteries, defined as those with ≥50% stenosis and a diameter ≥1.5 mm. A threshold of QFR ≤0.80 was considered functionally significant stenosis. The primary outcome was graft occlusion at 12 months evaluated by computed tomography angiography.

RESULTS

Two thousand twenty-four patients with 7432 grafts (2307 arterial grafts and 5125 vein grafts) were included. For the arterial grafts, the risk of 12-month occlusion was significantly increased in the QFR >0.80 group than in the QFR ≤0.80 group (7.1% vs 2.6%; P = .001; unadjusted model: odds ratio, 3.08; 95% CI, 1.65-5.75; fully adjusted model: odds ratio, 2.67; 95% CI, 1.44-4.97). No significant association was observed in the vein grafts (4.6% vs 4.3%; P = .67; unadjusted model: odds ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.82-1.47; fully adjusted model: odds ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.83-1.51). Results were stable across sensitivity analyses with a QFR threshold of 0.78 and 0.75.

CONCLUSIONS

Target vessel QFR >0.80 was associated with a significantly higher risk of arterial graft occlusion at 12 months after coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. No significant association was found between target lesion QFR and vein graft occlusion.

Expert systematic review on the choice of conduits for coronary artery bypass grafting: endorsed by the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS)

PREAMBLE

The finalized document was endorsed by the EACTS Council and STS Executive Committee before being simultaneously published in the European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery (EJCTS) and The Annals of Thoracic Surgery (The Annals) and the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (JTCVS).

No-Touch Versus Conventional Vein Harvesting Techniques at 12 Months After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Surgery: Multicenter Randomized, Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Vein graft occlusion is deemed a major challenge in coronary artery bypass grafting. Previous studies implied that the no-touch technique for vein graft harvesting could reduce occlusion rate compared with the conventional approach; however, evidence on the clinical benefit and generalizability of the no-touch technique is scare.

METHODS

From April 2017 to June 2019, we randomly assigned 2655 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting at 7 hospitals in a 1:1 ratio to receive no-touch technique or conventional approach for vein harvesting. The primary outcome was vein graft occlusion on computed tomography angiography at 3 months and the secondary outcomes included 12-month vein graft occlusion, recurrence of angina, and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events. The generalized estimate equation model was used to account for the cluster effect of grafts from the same patient.

RESULTS

During the follow-up, 2533 (96.0%) participants received computed tomography angiography at 3 months after coronary artery bypass grafting and 2434 (92.2%) received it at 12 months. The no-touch group had significantly lower rates of vein graft occlusion than the conventional group both at 3 months (2.8% versus 4.8%; odds ratio, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.41-0.80]; P<0.001) and 12 months (3.7% versus 6.5%; odds ratio, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.41-0.76]; P<0.001). Recurrence of angina was also less common in the no-touch group at 12 months (2.3% versus 4.1%; odds ratio, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.35-0.85]; P<0.01). Rates of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were of no significant difference between the 2 groups. The no-touch technique was associated with higher rates of leg wound surgical interventions at 3-month follow-up (10.3% versus 4.3%; odds ratio, 2.55 [95% CI, 1.85-3.52]; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the conventional vein harvesting approach in coronary artery bypass grafting, the no-touch technique significantly reduced the risk of vein graft occlusion and improved patient prognosis. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03126409.

No-touch saphenous vein grafts in coronary artery surgery (SWEDEGRAFT): Rationale and design of a multicenter, prospective, registry-based randomized clinical trial

The SWEDEGRAFT study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03501303) tests the hypothesis that saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) harvested with the "no-touch" technique improves patency of coronary artery bypass grafts compared with the conventional open skeletonized technique. This article describes the rationale and design of the randomized trial and baseline characteristics of the population enrolled during the first 9 months of enrollment. The SWEDEGRAFT study is a prospective, binational multicenter, open-label, registry-based trial in patients undergoing first isolated nonemergent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), randomized 1:1 to no-touch or conventional open skeletonized vein harvesting technique, with a planned enrollment of 900 patients. The primary end point is the proportion of patients with graft failure defined as SVGs occluded or stenosed >50% on coronary computed tomography angiography at 2 years after CABG, earlier clinically driven coronary angiography demonstrating an occluded or stenosed >50% vein graft, or death within 2 years. High-quality health registries and coronary computed tomography angiography are used to assess the primary end point. The secondary end points include wound healing in the vein graft sites and the composite outcome of major adverse cardiac events during the first 2 years based on registry data. Demographics of the first 200 patients enrolled in the trial and other CABG patients operated in Sweden during the same time period are comparable when the exclusion criteria are taken into consideration. RCT# NCT03501303.

Twenty-Five Years of No-Touch Saphenous Vein Harvesting for Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Structural Observations and Impact on Graft Performance

The saphenous vein is the most common conduit used in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) yet its failure rate is higher compared to arterial grafts. An improvement in saphenous vein graft performance is therefore a major priority in CABG. No-touch harvesting of the saphenous vein is one of the few interventions that has shown improved patency rates, comparable to that of the left internal thoracic artery. After more than two decades of no-touch research, this technique is now recognized as a Class IIa recommendation in the 2018 European Society of Cardiology and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery guidelines on myocardial revascularization. In this review, we describe the structural alterations that occur in conventional versus no-touch saphenous vein grafts and how these changes affect graft patency. In addition, we discuss various strategies aimed at repairing saphenous vein grafts prepared at conventional CABG.