Is the era of bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting coming for diabetic patients? An updated meta-analysis

Meta-analysis of BITA versus SITA grafting in diabetic patients: evidence from propensity score-matched studies

BACKGROUND

It has been demonstrated that the use of bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) grafting in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) improves long-term survival in comparison to the use of a single internal thoracic artery (SITA) graft. However, the optimal transplantation technique for diabetic patients remains undetermined. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the effectiveness and safety of BITA and SITA CABG in diabetic patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of Google Scholar, Science Direct, and PubMed was conducted for studies with propensity score-matched comparing between BITA and SITA grafting in diabetic patients. The main goal was to know mid- to long-term mortality, and the supplementary results included incidence of deep sternal wound infection, 30-day mortality, and incidence of reoperation due to hemorrhage.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 11 studies involving 3762 diabetic patients with matched propensity scores. Compared to SITA grafting, BITA grafting was associated with a significant reduction in long-term mortality (HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.67-0.91), P = 0.03, I2 = 54%. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of 30-day mortality, reoperation for bleeding, cerebrovascular accident, or renal failure.

CONCLUSIONS

BITA grafting appears to provide better overall survival than SITA grafting in patients with diabetes. However, using BITA grafting is associated with a greater risk of deep sternal wound infection. These findings may help guide the choice of grafting technique in diabetic patients undergoing CABG.

The efficacy of minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (mics cabg) for patients with coronary artery diseases and diabetes: a single center retrospective study

BACKGROUND

conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CCABG) tends to cause severe complications in patients with comorbid Coronary Artery Diseases (CAD) and diabetes. On the other hand, the Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (MICS CABG) via transthoracic incision is associated with rapid recovery and reduced complications. Adding to the limited literature, this study compares CCABG and MICS CABG in terms of efficacy and safety.

METHODS

Herein, 104 CCABG and MICS CABG cases (52 cases each) were included. The patients were recruited from the Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery Center, Anzhen Hospital, between January 2017 and December 2021 and were selected based on the Propensity Score Matching (PSM) model. The key outcomes included All-cause Death, Myocardial Infarction (MI), Cerebrovascular Events, revascularization, Adverse Wound Healing Events and one-year patency of the graft by coronary CTA.

RESULTS

Compared to CCABG, MICS CABG had longer surgical durations [4.25 (1.50) h vs.4.00 (1.13) h, P = 0.028], but showed a reduced intraoperative blood loss [600.00 (400.00) mL vs.700.00 (300.00) mL, P  = 0.032] and a lower secondary incision debridement and suturing rate (5.8% vs.19.2%, P = 0.038). In follow up, no statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in the cumulative Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Events (MACCEs) incidence (7.7% vs. 5.9%), all-cause mortality (0 vs. 0), MI incidence (1.9% vs. 2.0%), cerebral apoplexy incidence (5.8% vs. 3.9%), and repeated revascularization incidence (0 vs. 0) (P > 0.05). Additionally, coronary CTA results revealed that the two groups' one-year graft patency (94.2% vs. 90.2%, P = 0.761) showed no statistically significant difference.

CONCLUSION

In patients with comorbid CAD and diabetes, MICS CABG and CCABG had comparable revascularization performances. Moreover, MICS CABG can effectively reduce, if not prevent, poor clinical outcomes/complications, including incision healing, sternal infection and prolonged length of stay in diabetes patients.

Outcomes after surgical revascularization in diabetic patients

OBJECTIVES

Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) have been repeatedly demonstrated to have worse clinical outcomes compared to patients without DM. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of DM on 1-year clinical outcomes after isolated CABG.

METHODS

The European DuraGraft registry included 1130 patients (44.6%) with and 1402 (55.4%) patients without DM undergoing isolated CABG. Intra-operatively, all free venous and arterial grafts were treated with an endothelial damage inhibitor. Primary end point in this analysis was the incidence of a major adverse cardiac event (MACE), a composite of all-cause death, repeat revascularization or myocardial infarction at 1 year post-CABG. To balance between differences in baseline characteristics (n = 1072 patients in each group), propensity score matching was used. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was performed to identify independent predictors of MACE.

RESULTS

Diabetic patients had a higher cardiovascular risk profile and EuroSCORE II with overall more comorbidities. Patients were comparable in regard to surgical techniques and completeness of revascularization. At 1 year, diabetics had a higher MACE rate {7.9% vs 5.5%, hazard ratio (HR) 1.43 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-1.95], P = 0.02}, driven by increased rates of death [5.6% vs 3.5%, HR 1.61 (95% CI 1.10-2.36), P = 0.01] and myocardial infarction [2.8% vs 1.4%, HR 1.99 (95% CI 1.12-3.53) P = 0.02]. Following propensity matching, no statistically significant difference was found for MACE [7.1% vs 5.7%, HR 1.23 (95% CI 0.87-1.74) P = 0.23] or its components. Age, critical operative state, extracardiac arteriopathy, ejection fraction ≤50% and left main disease but not DM were identified as independent predictors for MACE.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, 1-year outcomes in diabetics undergoing isolated CABG were comparable to patients without DM.

Very Long-term Outcome of Bilateral Internal Thoracic Artery in Diabetic Patients: A Systematic Review and Reconstructed Time-To-Event Meta-analysis

The benefits of single (SITA) and bilateral internal thoracic arteries (BITA) in diabetics undergoing coronary bypass grafting (CABG) are conflicting. We undertook a study-level meta-analysis to compare early and long-term outcomes of both CABG configurations. PubMed, CENTRAL, and EMBASE were searched for studies comparing BITA versus SITA for isolated CABG surgery in diabetics. Randomized trials or observational studies were considered eligible for the analysis. Kaplan-Meier curves of long-term survival were reconstructed and compared with Cox linear regression; incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for long-term survival were calculated. Landmark analysis and time-varying hazard ratio (HR) were analyzed. Odds ratios (OR) were extracted for early mortality, postoperative stroke, deep sternal wound infection (DSWI), and myocardial infarction (MI). A random effects meta-analysis was performed. Sensitivity analyses included leave-one-out-analyses and meta-regression. Thirteen studies (7332 patients) were included. Overall, at 20-year follow-up, BITA was associated with higher survival (HR = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.71-0.84; P < 0.0001). Time-varying HR and landmark analysis reported BITA was associated with a higher rate of 10-year survival (HR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.68-0.82, P < 0.0001), while from 10 to 20-year follow-up no difference was revealed (HR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.82-1.19, P = 0.93). There was no increase in early mortality, postoperative MI, stroke, or DSWI between the groups. At meta-regression, the higher the age, the higher the long-term overall survival in patients with BITA. In diabetics, the BITA approach is associated with improved 10-year survival with no increase in early mortality, MI, stroke, or DSWI. In the 10-20-year timeframe, BITA and SITA showed comparable survival.

Immediate Results after Multiple Arterial Grafts in Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery in the São Paulo State: Cross Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The short-term results after using arterial grafts still raise questions and doubts for medical society.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the immediate outcomes of patients undergoing single arterial graft versus multiple arterial grafts coronary artery bypass grafting surgery.

METHODS

Cross-sectional cohort study in the São Paulo Registry of Cardiovascular Surgery II (REPLICCAR II). Perioperative data from 3122 patients were grouped by the number of arterial grafts used, and their outcomes were compared: reoperation, deep sternal wound infection (DSWI), stroke, acute kidney injury, prolonged intubation (>24 hours), short hospital stay (<6 days), prolonged hospital stay (>14 days), morbidity and mortality. Propensity Score Matching (PSM) matched 1062 patients, adjusted for the mortality risk.

RESULTS

After PSM, the single arterial graft group showed patients with advanced age, more former smokers, hypertension, diabetes, stable angina, and previous myocardial infarction. In the multiple arterial grafts, there was a predominance of males, recent pneumonia, and urgent surgeries. After the procedure, there was a higher incidence of pleural effusion (p=0.042), pneumonia (p=0.01), reintubation (p=0.006), DSWI (p=0.007), and sternal debridement (p=0.015) in the multiple arterial grafts group, however, less need for blood transfusion (p=0.005), extremity infections (p=0.002) and shorter hospital stays (p=0.036). Bilateral use of the internal thoracic artery was not related to increased DSWI rate, but glycosylated hemoglobin >6.40% (p=0.048).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing the multiarterial technique had a higher incidence of pulmonary complications, and DSWI, where glycosylated hemoglobin ≥6.40%, had a greater influence on the infectious outcome than the choice of grafts.

Whatever happens, two mammary is better than one

It is well known that the left internal mammary artery (LIMA) should be the first conduit of choice. Similarly, especially in patients younger than 70 years, other conduits should be search among arterial grafts, such as right internal mammary artery (RIMA) or radial artery (RA). If the RA can be harvested in the meanwhile of LIMA harvesting without time consuming, it is well established that former one has to be grafted only on presence of a good run-off. One of the main criticisms moved to the use of RIMA are linked to technical difficulties in its harvesting it.

How to build a multi-arterial coronary artery bypass programme: a stepwise approach

Observational evidence shows that the use of multiple arterial grafts (MAG) is associated with longer postoperative survival and improved clinical outcomes. The current European Society of Cardiology/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery Guidelines on myocardial revascularization recommend the use of MAG in appropriate patients. However, a significant volume-to-outcome relationship exists for MAG, and lack of sufficient experience is associated with increased operative risk. A stepwise approach to building experience with MAG allows successful implementation of this technique into routine coronary surgery practice.