Transit-time flow characteristics of in situ right gastroepiploic arterial grafts in coronary artery bypass grafting

Improving coronary artery bypass grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis on the impact of adopting transit-time flow measurement

Despite there being numerous studies of intraoperative graft flow assessment by transit-time flow measurement (TTFM) on outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), the adoption of contemporary TTFM is low. Therefore, on 31 January 2018, a systematic literature search was performed to identify articles that reported (i) the amount of grafts classified as abnormal or which were revised or (ii) an association between TTFM and outcomes during follow-up. Random-effects models were used to create pooled estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) of (i) the rate of graft revision per patient, (ii) the rate of graft revision per graft and (iii) the rate of graft revision among grafts deemed abnormal based on TTFM parameters. The search yielded 242 articles, and 66 original articles were included in the systematic review. Of those articles, 35 studies reported on abnormal grafts or graft revisions (8943 patients, 15 673 grafts) and were included in the meta-analysis. In 4.3% of patients (95% CI 3.3–5.7%, I² = 73.9) a revision was required and 2.0% of grafts (95% CI 1.5–2.5%; I²=66.0) were revised. The pooled rate of graft revisions among abnormal grafts was 25.1% (95% CI 15.5–37.9%; I²=80.2). Studies reported sensitivity ranging from 0.250 to 0.457 and the specificity from 0.939 to 0.984. Reported negative predictive values ranged from 0.719 to 0.980 and reported positive predictive values ranged from 0.100 to 0.840. This systematic review and meta-analysis showed that TTFM could improve CABG procedures. However, due to heterogeneous data, drawing uniform conclusions appeared challenging. Future studies should focus on determining the optimal use of TTFM and assessing its diagnostic accuracy.

Relationship of Intraoperative Transit Time Flowmetry Findings to Angiographic Graft Patency at Follow-Up

Early and late graft occlusion remains a significant complication of coronary artery bypass grafting. Transit time flowmetry is the most commonly used imaging technique to assess graft patency intraoperatively. Although the value of transit time flowmetry for intraoperative quality control of coronary anastomosis is well established, its standard variables for predicting eventual graft failure remain controversial. This review readdresses the issue of intraoperative transit time flowmetry, with a particular emphasis on defining cutoff values for standard variables and correlating them with the ability to predict midterm and long-term graft patency for arterial and venous conduits. Further research is warranted to support clinically useful recommendations on the intraoperative application and interpretation of transit time flowmetry.

New parameter of the right gastroepiploic arterial graft using the power spectral analysis device named MemCalc soft

OBJECTIVES

Transit-time flow measurement (TTFM) parameters such as mean graft flow (MGF, ml/min), pulsatility index (PI) and diastolic filling (DF, %) have been extensively researched for internal mammary arterial or saphenous vein grafts. In our experience of using the right gastroepiploic arterial (GEA) graft for right coronary artery (RCA) grafting, we observed unique GEA graft flow waveforms. We analysed the GEA graft flow waveforms for their effectiveness in determining GEA graft patency by power spectral analysis.

METHODS

Forty-five patients underwent off-pump coronary artery bypass using the GEA graft for RCA grafting individually. The means of intraoperative MGF, PI and DF were compared between patent and non-patent grafts, postoperatively. Furthermore, the GEA flow data were output and analysed using power spectral analysis.

RESULTS

Forty grafts were 'patent' and five were 'non-patent'. There were no significant differences in the mean TTFM parameters between the patent and non-patent grafts (MGF: 22 vs 8 ml/min, respectively, P = 0.068; PI: 3.5 vs 6.5, respectively, P = 0.155; DF: 63 vs 53%, respectively, P = 0.237). Results of the power spectral analysis presented clear differences; the power spectral density (PSD) of patent grafts presented high peaks at frequency levels of 1, 2 and 3 Hz, and the non-patent graft PSD presented high peaks that were not limited to these frequencies. The PSD had a sensitivity and specificity of 80 and 87.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Power spectral analysis of the GEA graft flow is useful to distinguish between non-patent and patent grafts intraoperatively. This should be used as a fourth parameter along with MGF, PI and DF.

Intraoperative graft assessment during coronary artery bypass surgery

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is an established revascularization method for treating multivessel coronary artery disease. The goal of CABG is to achieve complete revascularization with a durable, patent graft without reintervention. However, early graft failure, including that associated with technical errors, has been reported. This makes intraoperative verification of graft patency one of the most important ways in which surgeons can reduce the rate of early graft failure. Conventional angiography is considered the gold standard for graft assessment. However, because it is invasive and inconvenient, several alternatives to intraoperative graft assessment have become available that help reduce early graft failure by allowing revision of the anastomosis intraoperatively. The aim of this article is to review the advantages and disadvantages of several intraoperative graft assessment methods for CABG.