Off-Pump Right Coronary Artery Bypass With Saphaneous Vein or In-Situ Right Internal Thoracic Artery

Does a third arterial conduit to the right coronary circulation improve survival?

BACKGROUND

The long-term benefits of a third arterial conduit to the right circulation in triple-vessel disease remain debatable. This retrospective, single-center, propensity-matched study investigates the impact of a third arterial conduit to the right circulation on early and intermediate survival after coronary artery bypass grafting.

METHODS

Data were retrospectively collected from 2004 to 2014 for all surgical revascularizations for triple-vessel disease with at least 2 arterial conduits to the left circulation and a third arterial or venous conduit to the right circulation. A total of 167 pairs were propensity matched to arterial versus venous third conduit to right circulation. Hazard functions were obtained with Cox multivariate regression and Kaplan-Meier survival curves were compared between the matched cohorts.

RESULTS

Extracardiac arteriopathy, logistic euroSCORE, and left main stem disease were significant predictors of adverse survival. A third arterial conduit to the right circulation was not a significant predictor of improved survival in multivariate analysis (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.34-1.55; P = .411). 30-day mortality was 0.6% in both groups. There was no significant difference in early or intermediate survival in the propensity-matched groups (venous vs arterial, 99.2% vs 99.2%; P = 1.000 at 1 year; 85.2% vs 88.8%; P = .248 at 5 years and 69.2% vs 88.8%; P = .297 at 7 years) CONCLUSIONS: The use of a third arterial versus a venous conduit to the right circulation does not improve early or intermediate survival up to 7 years in triple-vessel coronary artery disease in this study. Longer follow-up and larger cohorts may be needed for differences to emerge.

Does the right internal thoracic artery or saphenous vein graft offer superior revascularization of the right coronary artery?

A best evidence topic was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether the right internal thoracic artery (RITA) provides a superior outcome for revascularization of the right coronary artery (RCA) compared with the saphenous vein graft (SVG). Using a designated search strategy, 226 articles were found, of which five represented the best available evidence. The authors, journal, date, country of publication, study type, patient group studied, relevant outcomes and results were tabulated. Of these five studies, one offered level I evidence (data from a randomized trial) and four were level II studies (reports of observational data). The outcome measures varied considerably, but most included graft patency at varying levels of the follow-up. The randomized data showed strong evidence favouring the SVG, mainly in terms of mid-term patency. With the exception of a large cohort study that demonstrated the superior patency of the RITA compared with the SVG in the right coronary territory, the observational studies showed better results for SVG in graft patency, reintervention and cardiovascular complication rate. Overall, and in view of the methodological limitations and the different weight of evidence among studies, it appears that the SVG may offer a superior outcome for revascularization of the RCA when compared with the RITA.