Bypass Grafting to Circumflex: Left Internal Thoracic Artery versus Saphenous Vein

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) and in situ left internal thoracic artery (LITA) grafts to the left circumflex artery (LCX) territory.

METHODS

This study included 678 patients who underwent LITA-left anterior descending (LAD) + SVG-LCX grafts and 286 patients who underwent right internal thoracic artery (RITA)-LAD + in situ LITA-LCX grafts from January 2002 to December 2020. Short-term and long-term clinical outcomes were compared using inverse probability of treatment weighting adjustment to reduce selection bias.

RESULTS

In-hospital mortality was significantly higher for the SVG-LCX group (p = 0.008), whereas deep sternal wound infection was significantly higher in the LITA-LCX group (p = 0.013).Survival rates at 5 and 10 years were 83.12 and 71.45% in the SVG-LCX group, whereas 75.24 and 65.54% in the LITA-LCX group (log-rank p = 0.114). Rates of freedom from cardiac events at 5 and 10 years were 92.82 and 85.24% in the SVG-LCX group, whereas 94.89 and 89.46% in the LITA-LCX group (log-rank p = 0.179).Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that proximal severe stenosis was significantly protective against graft dysfunction before discharge (odds ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.81).

CONCLUSION

Deep sternal wound infection was significantly higher for LITA to LCX bypass whereas in-hospital mortality was higher for SVG to LCX. In situ LITA to LCX bypass grafting exhibited similar long-term outcomes with SVG to LCX bypass grafting in adjusted patient cohorts. Proximal severe stenosis of LCX was protective against graft dysfunction.

Differences in long-term survival outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting using single vs multiple arterial grafts: a meta-analysis with reconstructed time-to-event data and subgroup analyses

OBJECTIVE

We reviewed the available literature on patients with coronary artery disease undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with either single (SAG) or multiple arterial grafting (MAG).

METHODS

Original research studies that evaluated the long-term survival of MAG versus SAG were identified, from 1995 to 2022. The median overall survival (OS) and event-free OS were the primary endpoints. Comparison of median OS between the right internal mammary artery (RIMA) and radial artery (RA) as a second arterial conduit was the secondary endpoint. Subgroup analyses were performed regarding patients older than 70 years, with diabetes mellitus, and females. A sensitivity analysis was performed with the leave-one-out method.

RESULTS

Forty-four studies were included in the qualitative and thirty-nine in the quantitative synthesis. After pooling data from 180 to 459 patients, the MAG group demonstrated a higher OS (HR, 0.589; 95% CI, 0.58-0.60; p < 0.0001) and event-free OS compared with the SAG group (HR, 0.828; 95% CI, 0.80-0.86; p < 0.0001). In addition, RITA was associated with superior OS compared with RA as a second arterial conduit (HR, 0.936; 95% CI, 0.89-0.98; p = 0.009). MAG was also superior to SAG in patients over 70 years, females, and patients with diabetes mellitus. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated a small-size study effect on the female subgroup analysis.

CONCLUSION

The present meta-analysis indicates that MAG is associated with enhanced survival outcomes compared to SAG for patients undergoing isolated CABG.

Multiple versus single arterial grafting in the elderly: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity score studies

INTRODUCTION

The benefit of adding a second arterial conduit is still controversial, mainly in specific subgroups. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity score (PS) studies comparing survival and early results in elderly patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with multiple (MAG) versus single arterial grafting (SAG).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

MEDLINE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were used to find relevant literature (1960-April 2020). Survival at a ≥ 1-year follow-up and early outcomes were evaluated. Outcomes were collected from matched samples or PS adjusted analysis: hazard ratio (HR) along with their variance, frequencies or odds ratios. Random effect models were used to compute combined statistical measures and 95% confidence intervals (CI) through generic inverse variance method (time-to-event) or Mantel-Haenszel method (binary events).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Eleven PS cohorts and 1 RCT comprising > 18,800 patients older than 70 (>6200 MAG and >12,500 SAG) were included in this meta-analysis. MAG was associated with lower long-term mortality (pooled HR: 0.81, 95%CI: 0.72-0.91, p<0.01, I2=64%) in the absence of higher risk of early mortality (pooled OR: 0.74, 95%CI: 0.44 to 1.25, p=0.27, I2=0%). In a meta-regression, MAG survival advantage was more pronounced in studies with a higher MAG usage rate (β = -0.0052, p=0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests that advanced age should not limit MAG's use considering its benefits in long-term survival. Of note, an individualized patient selection for this approach is warranted.