Neurologic sequelae of the donor arm after endoscopic versus conventional radial artery harvesting

Clinical anatomy of the lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve: Is there any safe zone for interventional approach?

INTRODUCTION

The lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve (LACN) is a somatosensory nerve coursing in the lateral portion of the forearm. The nerve is located in a close proximity to the cephalic vein (CV) all along its course with a danger of being injured during venipuncture. The LACN also overlaps and communicates with the superficial branch of the radial nerve (SBRN) in the distal forearm and hand, making the awareness of their relationship of great importance in the treatment of neuroma. The aim of the study was to observe the relationship of the LACN to surrounding structures as well as its branching pattern and distribution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety-three cadaveric forearms embalmed in formaldehyde were dissected. The relationship of the LACN to surrounding structures was noted and photographed, and distances between the structures were measured with a digital caliper. The cross-sectional relationships of the LACN and SBRN to the CV were described using heatmaps.

RESULTS

The emerging point of the LACN was found distally, proximally or at the level of the interepicondylar line (IEL). The LACN branched in 76 cases (81.7 %) into an anterior and posterior branch at mean distance of 47.8 ± 34.2 mm distal to the IEL. The sensory distribution was described according to the relationship of the LACN branches to the medial border of the brachioradialis muscle. The LACN supplying the dorsum of the hand was observed in 39.8 % of cases. The LACN and the SBRN intersected in 86 % of upper limbs with communications noticed in 71 % of forearms. The LACN was stated as the most frequent donor of the communicating branch resulting in neuroma located distal to the communication and being fed from the LACN. The relationship of the LACN and the CV showed that the IEL is the most appropriate place for the venipuncture due to maximal calibers of the CV and deep position of the LACN. The LACN was adjacent to the cubital perforating vein and the radial artery in all cases. The medial border of the brachioradialis muscle was observed less than 1.8 mm from the LACN.

CONCLUSION

The study provides morphological data on the LACN distribution, branching pattern and relationship to surrounding structures in a context of clinical use in different spheres of medicine. The branching pattern of the LACN appears to be more constant compared to data provided by previous authors. We emphasized the meaning of cross-sectional relationship of the LACN to the CV to avoid venipuncture outside the cubital fossa if possible. The posterior branch of the LACN was predicted as appropriate donor of the graft for a digital nerve. The LACN appeared to be in a close proximity within the whole length of the brachioradialis muscle what the orthopedic surgeons must be concerned of. The meaning of the donor-nerve of the communicating branch in neuroma treatment was also introduced.

Is endoscopic radial artery harvesting open for business?

With the resurgence of the radial artery in coronary artery bypass grafting, the debate on the optimal harvesting technique continues. Here, we comment on a randomized series in which the authors conclude that endoscopic harvesting techniques offer the benefit of improved cosmetic outcomes and decreased neurological complications with comparable graft-related outcomes when compared with open harvesting. We conclude that although this study is well designed and conducted, there are several areas of concern including surgical technique and statistical power.

Radial artery harvesting in coronary artery bypass grafting surgery-Endoscopic or open method? A meta-analysis

We analyzed the clinical outcomes of open radial artery harvesting (OAH) and endoscopic radial artery harvesting (EAH) undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). We designed this meta-analysis conducted using Pubmed, Medline, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE. Articles with comparisons of OAH and EAH undergoing CABG were included. Primary outcomes included the wound infection rate, the wound complication rate, neurological complications of the forearm, in-hospital mortality, long-term survival, and the patency rate. The results of our study included six randomized controlled trials (RCTs), two non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs) with matching, and 10 NRCTs. In total, 2919 patients were included in 18 studies, while 1187 (40.7%) and 1732 (59.3%) patients received EAH and OAH, respectively. EAH was associated with a lower incidence of wound infection (RR = 0.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.14 to 0.60, p = 0.03), and neurological complications over the harvesting site (RR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.27 to 0.62, p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality, long-term survival (over one year), and the graft patency rate. According to our analysis, endoscopic radial artery harvesting can improve the outcome of the harvesting site, without affecting the mortality, long-term survival, and graft patency.

Randomized Trial of 2 Endoscopic Radial Artery Harvesting Devices-Immunofluorescence Assessment

BACKGROUND

Various devices are available for endoscopic radial artery harvesting during coronary artery bypass grafting. Thermal spread and graft damage, however, are common concerns. The aim of this study was to compare the MiFusion TLS2 system (Endotrust, Nettetal Germany) with direct heat technique and the LigaSure Maryland system (Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland) using advanced bipolar technique in a prospective randomized study.

METHODS

One hundred consecutive patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting with endoscopic radial artery harvesting were prospectively included and randomized 1:1. The proximal (brachial) ends of the grafts were analyzed using fluorescence microscopy with focus on graft integrity. In addition, harvesting time, graft sealing, residual bleeding, and incidence of neurological disorders were compared.

RESULTS

Patient age was 67 ± 8 years. Mean harvesting time was 26.5 ± 9 minutes for the TLS2 and 23.2 ± 8 minutes for the LigaSure (P = .049). Overall graft integrity was good in both groups. A significantly better graft integrity was observed in the LigaSure group (scale 0 to 3; 3 = best) with 2.5 ± 0.6 for TLS2 and 2.8 ± 0.4 for LigaSure (P = .031). LigaSure provided significantly better graft sealing (scale 0 to 2; 0 = best) with 0.6 ± 0.7 vs 1.0 ± 0.6 (TLS2) (P = .006) and less residual bleeding (scale 1 to 5; 1 = best) with 1.4 ± 0.6 vs 2.0 ± 0.9 (TLS2) (P < .001). Transient sensibility disorders were less frequently observed with LigaSure (2% vs 16%, P = .015).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic radial artery harvesting can be performed with excellent results and good graft integrity using both devices. Compared with the MiFusion TLS2, the LigaSure device led to faster procedural times and resulted in better graft integrity. Along with providing a better seal, LigaSure was associated with less sensibility disorders.

Technical Aspects of the Use of the Radial Artery in Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery

BACKGROUND

The radial artery has been used for coronary artery bypass surgery for more than 25 years. The recent confirmation of the clinical benefits associated with the use of the artery is likely to drive a new interest toward this conduit in the next few years.

METHODS

A group of surgeons with extensive experience in the systematic use of the radial artery summarize here the key technical aspects of the use of the conduit for coronary bypass operations.

RESULTS

Preoperative evaluation of the ulnar collateral circulation and attention to the characteristics of the target vessel are keys for the successful use of the radial artery. Open or endoscopic harvesting can be used, preferentially with the aid of the harmonic scalpel. The use of vasodilatory and antispastic protocols is probably important but poorly supported by the current evidence. The radial artery can be used for multiple grafting strategies with a variable degree of technical complexity.

CONCLUSIONS

With attention to few technical key points, the radial artery is a versatile conduit that can be easily introduced in the everyday practice of coronary artery bypass surgery.

A Prospective Randomized Study of Endoscopic Versus Conventional Harvesting of the Radial Artery

OBJECTIVE

The aims of the study were to determine whether endoscopic harvesting of the radial artery (RA) reduces morbidity due to pain, infection, and disability with improvement in satisfaction and cosmesis compared to the conventional technique and (2) to compare the 6-month angiographic patency of the RA harvested conventionally and endoscopically.

METHODS

In a prospective randomized study, 119 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting using the RA were randomized to have RA harvested either conventionally (n = 59) or endoscopically (n = 60).

RESULTS

Radial artery harvest time (open wound time) was significantly reduced in the endoscopic group (36.5 ± 9.4 vs 57.7 ± 9.4 minutes, P < 0.001). Only one patient developed wound infection (1.6%) in the endoscopic group compared with six patients (10.2%), P = 0.061, in the conventional group. Although this was not statistically significant, clinically this was relevant in terms of reduction in postoperative morbidity. Postoperative pain in the arm incision was significantly lower in the endoscopic group at postoperative day 2 (P < 0.001) and at discharge (P < 0.001) and similar to the conventional open group at 6 weeks' follow-up (P = 0.103). Overall patient satisfaction and cosmesis were significantly better in the endoscopic group at postoperative day 2 (P < 0.001), at discharge (P < 0.001), and at 6 weeks' follow-up (P < 0.001). There was no difference in the arm disability postoperatively (P = 0.505) between the two groups. Six-month angiographic assessment of 23 patients (12 endoscopic and 11 open) revealed no difference in the patency rate (10/12 in endoscopic and 9/11 in open group).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic RA harvesting reduced the incidence of postoperative wound infection and wound pain and improved patient satisfaction and cosmesis compared with conventional harvesting technique. There was no difference in the 6-month angiographic patency of the RA harvested conventionally and endoscopically.

Endoscopic Conduit Harvest in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Surgery

Objective

The purpose of this consensus conference was to develop and update evidence-informed consensus statements and recommendations on harvesting saphenous vein and radial artery via an open as compared with endoscopic technique by systematically reviewing and performing a meta-analysis of randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials.

Methods

All randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized controlled trials included in the first the International Society for Minimally Invasive Cardiothoracic Surgery Consensus Conference and Statements,1,2 in 2005 up to November 30, 2015, were included in a systematic review and meta-analysis. Based on the resultant, 76 studies (23 randomized controlled trials and 53 nonrandomized controlled trials) on 281,459 patients analyzed, consensus statements, and recommendations were generated comparing the risks and benefits of endoscopic versus open conduit harvesting for patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting.

Results

Compared with open vein harvest, it is reasonable to perform endoscopic vein harvest of saphenous vein to reduce wound-related complications, postoperative length of stay, and outpatient wound management resources and to increase patient satisfaction (class I, level A). Based on the quality of the conduit and major adverse cardiac events as well as 6-month angiographic patency, endoscopic vein harvest was noninferior to open harvest. It is reasonable to perform endoscopic radial artery harvest to reduce wound-related complication and to increase patient satisfaction (class I, level B-R and B-NR, respectively) with reduction in major adverse cardiac events and noninferior patency rate at 1 and 3 to 5 years (class III, level B-R).

Conclusions

Based on the consensus statements, the consensus panel recommends (class I, level B) that endoscopic saphenous vein and radial artery harvesting should be the standard of care for patients who require these conduits for coronary revascularization.

Long-term patency of endoscopically harvested radial arteries: from a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

From 2005 to 2007, 119 patients were enrolled in a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing open and endoscopically harvested radial arteries for coronary artery bypass grafting. The objective of the current study was to compare graft patency between intervention groups at more than 5 years from the initial trial. We hypothesized that endoscopically harvested radial arteries would show equivalent patency to those conventionally harvested.

METHODS

At 5 years or greater from their operation, all consenting patients underwent a single-day anatomic and functional cardiac assessment with coronary computed tomography angiography and sestamibi myocardial perfusion scanning. Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Surveys and Seattle Angina Questionnaires were completed to assess the overall quality of life. All patients had received calcium channel blocker therapy for at least 6 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) duration of follow-up was 79.2 (8.6) months for all patients. One death occurred within 30 days of coronary artery bypass grafting in each treatment group, and eight additional noncardiac deaths occurred during the study time frame. Of 119 patients, 66 consented to follow-up. Thirty-two had open radial artery harvest, and 34 had endoscopic radial artery harvest. At more than 5 years, there were 28 patent conventionally harvested radial arteries (87.5%) and 31 patent endoscopically harvested radial arteries (91.2%) (P = 0.705). Measured quality of life was comparable between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic radial artery harvest is safe and effective when compared with open radial artery harvest, with excellent graft patency demonstrated at more than 5 years. Patency results are noninferior in endoscopic radial artery harvest.

Endoscopic versus open radial artery harvest and mammario-radial versus aorto-radial grafting in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery: protocol for the 2 × 2 factorial designed randomised NEO trial

Background

Coronary artery bypass grafting using the radial artery has, since the 1990s, gone through a revival. Observational studies have indicated better long-term patency when using radial arteries. Therefore, radial artery might be preferred especially in younger patients where long time patency is important. During the last 10 years different endoscopic techniques to harvest the radial artery have evolved. Endoscopic radial artery harvest only requires a small incision near the wrist in contrast to open harvest, which requires an incision from the elbow to the wrist. However, it is unknown whether the endoscopic technique results in fewer complications or a graft patency comparable to open harvest. When the radial artery has been harvested, there are two ways to use the radial artery as a graft. One way is sewing it onto the aorta and another is sewing it onto the mammary artery. It is unknown which technique is the superior revascularisation technique.

Methods/Design

The NEO Trial is a randomised clinical trial with a 2 × 2 factorial design. We plan to randomise 300 participants into four intervention groups: (1) mammario-radial endoscopic group; (2) aorto-radial endoscopic group; (3) mammario-radial open surgery group; and (4) aorto-radial open surgery group.

The hand function will be assessed by a questionnaire, a clinical examination, the change in cutaneous sensibility, and the measurement of both sensory and motor nerve conduction velocity at 3 months postoperatively. All the postoperative complications will be registered, and we will evaluate muscular function, scar appearance, vascular supply to the hand, and the graft patency including the patency of the central radial artery anastomosis. A patency evaluation by multi-slice computer tomography will be done at one year postoperatively.

We expect the nerve conduction studies and the standardised neurological examinations to be able to discriminate differences in hand function comparing endoscopic to open harvest of the radial artery. The trial also aims to show if there is any patency difference between mammario-radial compared to aorto-radial revascularisation techniques but this objective is exploratory.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01848886.

Danish Ethics committee number: H-3-2012-116.

Danish Data Protection Agency: 2007-58-0015/jr.n:30–0838.

Patients' satisfaction and wound-site complications after radial artery harvesting for coronary artery bypass

The aim of the study was to establish patients' satisfaction and the incidence of wound-site complications after radial artery (RA) harvesting for bypass surgery. A telephonic quality of life questionnaire was performed in 306 consecutive patients who had undergone coronary artery bypass grafting with the use of RA with the open technique. A psychometric Likert scale was used to define the degree of patients' satisfaction. The questionnaire concerned arm pain, cosmesis and mobility, sensory and neurological complications, and patients' general health state. The median values and the modal scores achieved the maximal value of satisfaction for all site-related complications and the mean scores were >4 out of 5. The median patients' general health state was 4. Cosmetic result of the wound was considered at least acceptable by 98% of patients. The incidence of impairing peripheral neurological complications was 16.7%. The degree of patients' satisfaction after RA harvesting was more than satisfactory and the incidence of wound-site complications was acceptable. The incidence of neurological injuries was lower than previously described.