Bilateral internal thoracic artery versus single internal thoracic artery: a meta-analysis of propensity score-matched observational studies

Off-pump bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting in patients with left main coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

To compare postoperative outcomes in patients with left main coronary artery disease who underwent off-pump isolated coronary artery bypass grafting for multivessel disease using either skeletonized bilateral or single internal thoracic artery (ITA).

METHODS

Among 1583 patients who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in our hospital between 2002 and 2022, 604 patients with left main coronary artery disease underwent single (n = 169) or bilateral (n = 435) ITA grafting. We compared postoperative outcomes between the two groups after adjusting preoperative characteristics using inverse probability of treatment weighting.

RESULTS

After adjustment using inverse probability of treatment weighting method, the sum of weights was 599.74 in BITA group and 621.64 in SITA group. There was no significant difference in postoperative deep sternal wound infection (p = 0.227) and 30-day mortality (p = 0.612). Follow-up was completed in 98.7% (596/604) of the patients, and the mean follow-up duration was 6.7 years. At 10 years, the overall survival following bilateral versus single ITA grafting was 71.2% and 60.6%, respectively (log-rank test, p = 0.040), and freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) was 63.3% and 46.3%, respectively (log-rank test, p = 0.008). In multivariate Cox proportional hazard models, bilateral ITA grafting was significantly associated with a lower risk of all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.706, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.504-0.987; p = 0.042) and MACCE (HR: 0.671, 95% CI: 0.499-0.902; p = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Bilateral skeletonized ITA grafting is associated with lower rates of all-cause death and MACCE than single ITA grafting in patients with left main coronary artery disease undergoing off-pump CABG.

Bilateral internal thoracic artery versus single internal thoracic artery plus radial artery: A double meta-analytic approach

OBJECTIVES

We explored the current evidence on the best second conduit in coronary surgery carrying out a double meta-analysis of propensity score matched or adjusted studies comparing bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) versus single internal thoracic artery plus radial artery.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched for propensity score matched or adjusted studies comparing BITA versus single internal thoracic artery plus radial artery. The end point was long-term mortality. Two statistical approaches were used: the generic inverse variance method and the pooled meta-analysis of Kaplan-Meier-derived individual patient data.

RESULTS

Twelve matched populations comparing 6450 patients with BITA versus 9428 patients with single internal thoracic artery plus radial artery were included in our meta-analysis. The generic inverse variance method showed a statistically significant survival benefit of the BITA group (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74-0.95; P = .04). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival at 1, 5, 10, and 15 years of the BITA group were 97.0%, 91.3%, 80.0%, and 68.0%, respectively. The Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival at 1, 5, 10, and 15 years of the single internal thoracic artery plus radial artery group were 97.3%, 91.5%, 79.9%, and 63.9%, respectively. The Kaplan-Meier-derived individual patient data meta-analysis applied to very long follow-up time data, showed that BITA provided a survival benefit after 10 years from surgery (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.63-0.94; P = .01). No differences in terms of survival between the 2 groups were detected when the analysis was focused on the first 10 years of follow-up (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.91-1.09; P = .93).

CONCLUSIONS

The present meta-analysis suggests that double internal thoracic artery may provide, compared with single internal thoracic artery plus radial artery, a statistically significant survival advantage after 10 years of follow-up, but not before. VIDEO ABSTRACT.

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery by-pass grafting in premature coronary artery disease: What is the evidence? -A narrative review

Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains one of the leading causes of death globally. In the United States of America, in 2016, 19% of all patients under the age of 65 died of cardiovascular disease despite improvements in primary prevention. The premature clinical onset of symptoms in the young population (<60 years) is much more aggressive than in the older population, and the overall long-term prognosis is poor. CAD appears to have a rapidly progressive form in those under the age of 60 due to genetic predisposition, smoking, and substance abuse, however, the ideal management strategy is still yet to be established. The two primary methods of establishing coronary revascularization are percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). Despite the increasing prevalence of CAD in the young population, they are consistently underrepresented in major randomized clinical trials of each revascularization strategy. Both CABG and PCI are known to have similar survival rates, but PCI is associated with higher repeat revascularization rate. Many argue this may be due to the progressive nature of CAD combined with the vessel patency time required in a patient under 60 with potentially another 20-30 years of life. There is little in literature regarding the outcomes of these various revascularization strategies in populations under 60 years with CAD. This review summarises the current evidence for each revascularisation strategy in patients under the age of 60 and suggests future avenues of research for this unique age group.

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.

Expert systematic review on the choice of conduits for coronary artery bypass grafting: endorsed by the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS)

PREAMBLE

The finalized document was endorsed by the EACTS Council and STS Executive Committee before being simultaneously published in the European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery (EJCTS) and The Annals of Thoracic Surgery (The Annals) and the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (JTCVS).

Reconstruction Technique Options for Achieving Total Arterial Revascularization and Multiple Arterial Grafting

Ischemic heart disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide and may require coronary revascularization when more severe or symptomatic. Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is the most common cardiac surgical procedure and can be performed with different bypass conduits and anastomotic techniques. Saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) are the most frequently used conduits for CABG, in addition to the left internal thoracic artery. Outcomes with a single internal thoracic artery and SVGs are favorable, and the long-term patency of SVGs may be improved through novel harvesting techniques, preservation methods, and optimal medical therapy. However, increasing evidence points towards the superiority of arterial grafts, especially in the form of multiple arterial grafting (MAG). Nevertheless, the uptake of MAG remains limited and variable, both as a result of technical complexity and a scarcity of conclusive randomized controlled trial evidence. Here, we present an overview of CABG techniques, harvesting methods, and anastomosis types to achieve total arterial revascularization and adopt MAG. We further narratively summarize the available evidence for MAG versus single arterial grafting to date and highlight remaining gaps and questions that require further study to elucidate the role of MAG in CABG.

Off-Pump Bilateral Skeletonized Internal Thoracic Artery Grafting in Octogenarians

BACKGROUND

We compared postoperative outcomes in octogenarians who underwent off-pump isolated coronary artery bypass grafting for multivessel disease using either skeletonized bilateral or single internal thoracic artery (ITA).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Among 1,532 patients who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting between 2002 and 2021, 173 octogenarians were analyzed retrospectively. After inverse probability of treatment weighting, we found no statistically significant difference regarding patients' preoperative characteristics. No patient experienced deep sternal wound infection. More patients in the single than bilateral ITA group died within 30 days after surgery (5.0% vs. 0%, respectively; P=0.003). The mean follow-up duration was 4.2 years. At 5 years, the freedom from overall death following bilateral versus single ITA grafting was 78.2% and 53.7%, respectively (log-rank test, P=0.003), and freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) was 67.9% and 44.8% respectively (log-rank test, P=0.002). In multivariable Cox models, bilateral ITA grafting was significantly associated with a lower risk of overall death (hazard ratio [HR] 0.555; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.342-0.903; P=0.018) and MACCE (HR 0.586; 95% CI 0.376-0.913; P=0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with single ITA grafting, off-pump skeletonized bilateral ITA grafting is associated with lower rates of overall death and MACCE in octogenarians undergoing CABG and does not increase the risk of deep sternal wound infection.

Meta-Analysis of Bilateral Versus Single Internal Thoracic Artery Grafting in Patients ≥70 Years of Age

The optimal choice of graft material in patients ≥70 years of age undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting remains unknown. A systematic review of literature was conducted by searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases for original publications that compared bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) grafting with single internal thoracic artery grafting in patients ≥70 years of age. Data were extracted by 2 independent investigators and meta-analyzed with the use of random effects. A total of 10 studies, including 11,185 patients, met the inclusion criteria. No differences in early mortality and morbidity, with the exemption of sternal wound complications which were more frequently observed in the BITA group (odds ratio 1.72, 95% 1.00 to 2.96 confidence interval [CI], p = 0.05; propensity score-matched population odds ratio 1.58, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.29, p = 0.02), were observed. Overall survival was superior in the overall patient population (hazard ratio [HR] 0.76, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.86, p <0.001), after applying a blanking period of 3 months to the overall patient population (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.92, p = 0.005) as well as in the matched population (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.89, p = 0.002); in all cases, a benefit was readily seen within a few years after surgery. The difference in freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events failed to reach statistical significance (overall patient population HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.13, p = 0.10; matched population HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.16, p = 0.11). In conclusion, BITA grafting can be safely performed in patients ≥70 years of age as late clinical benefits are expected to manifest themselves readily within a few years after surgery.

Bilateral Internal Thoracic Artery Grafting in Hemodialysis Patients

BACKGROUND

We compared postoperative outcomes in hemodialysis (HD) patients who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for multivessel disease using either bilateral or single skeletonized internal thoracic artery.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Among 1,486 patients who underwent isolated CABG between 2002 and 2020, 145 HD patients were retrospectively analyzed. After inverse probability of treatment weighting, there were no significant differences in the preoperative characteristics. No significant differences in 30-day mortality (P=0.551) or postoperative deep sternal wound infection (P=0.778) were observed. However, the bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting group had a lower postoperative stroke rate (0% vs. 4.0%, P=0.019). No significant differences in freedom from all-cause death (P=0.760) and cardiac death (P=0.863) were found. In the multivariate Cox proportional hazards models, bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting was not associated with all-cause death (P=0.246) or cardiac death (P=0.435).

CONCLUSIONS

Bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting in HD patients did not improve mid-term outcomes, but it was also not associated with worse postoperative outcomes. Use of the bilateral internal thoracic artery may be an important option in patients with limited conduits to prevent postoperative complications.

Coronary revascularization in acute coronary syndrome: does the choice of the conduit matter?

BACKGROUND

Our retrospective study evaluates the impact on short - and long-term outcome according to the graft selection during emergency coronary revascularization surgery.

METHODS

339 Patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing emergency coronary bypass surgery at our institution from 2008 until 2018 were analyzed using propensity score analysis. The primary endpoint was in-hospital survival. Secondary endpoints were postoperative bleeding, contractile dysfunction, postoperative percutaneous coronary intervention, myocardial infarction and wound infection. Patients were divided in two groups according to the bypass grafts received ((group 0, (n = 222): combined arterial and venous grafts for the and group 1 (n = 117): complete arterial revascularization).

RESULTS

There is significant improvement of left ventricular function postoperatively in patients undergoing emergency coronary revascularization for acute myocardial infarction where arterial grafts were used. Furthermore, there is significant difference between postoperative cardiac enzymes with lower values in group 1 (creatine kinase myocardial band p=0.0001; Troponin T p= 0,010). There was no significant difference in short and long-term survival between two groups. 5-years survival analysis between both groups did not show significant difference with Log-Rank test adjusted p-value = 0,49 (unadjusted p-value = 0.005). There was no significant difference in perioperative myocardial infarction, postoperative bleeding, and the need for postoperative coronary angiography.

CONCLUSIONS

Emergency coronary artery bypass grafting with arterial grafts shows significant improvement of left ventricular function postoperatively. However, utilization of bilateral internal mammary artery grafts in emergency coronary revascularization has no significant impact on short term or 5-year survival.

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.

Association of Age With 10-Year Outcomes After Coronary Surgery in the Arterial Revascularization Trial

BACKGROUND

The association of age with the outcomes of bilateral internal thoracic arteries (BITAs) versus single internal thoracic arteries (SITAs) for coronary bypass grafting (CABG) remains to be determined.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association between age and BITA versus SITA outcomes in the Arterial Revascularization Trial.

METHODS

The primary endpoints were all-cause mortality and a composite of major adverse events, including all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Secondary endpoints were bleeding complications and sternal wound complications up to 6 months after surgery. Multivariable fractional polynomials analysis and log-rank tests were used.

RESULTS

Age did not affect any of the explored outcomes in the overall BITA versus SITA comparison in the intention-to-treat analysis and in the analysis based on the number of arterial grafts received. However, when the intention-to-treat analysis was restricted to the populations of patients between age 50 and 70 years, younger patients in the BITA arm had a significantly lower incidence of major adverse events (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that BITA may improve long-term outcome in younger patients, although more randomized data are needed to confirm this hypothesis.

[Surgical treatment of sternal osteomyelitis and sternomediastinitis following cardiac surgery]

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the incidence of cardiac surgeries and postoperative sternal osteomyelitis/sternomediastinitis, as well as treatment outcomes in these patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We summarized 171 patients with postoperative sternal osteomyelitis and sternomediastinitis.

RESULTS

Organization of the Khabarovsk center for cardiovascular surgery in the Far Eastern Federal District was followed by 7.9- and 24.9-fold increase of the number of cardiac surgeries and CABG in 2005-2019, respectively. As a result, the number of patients with sternal osteomyelitis and sternomediastinitis after cardiac surgery increased from 0.50±0.10 to 1.59±0.17 cases per 100.000 (t=3.01; p<0.01). CPB and aortic clamping time (t=3.97; p<0.01), as well as surgery time (t=2.4; p<0.05) were significant risk factors of early postoperative complications. Two-stage surgical treatment of postoperative sternal osteomyelitis and sternomediastinitis (removal of ligatures and foreign bodies, sternal curettage with removal of sequesters at the first stage; resection of sternum with chest wall repair at the second stage) reduced hospital-stay from 31.9±13.4 to 29.2±10.8 days.

Total arterial revascularization strategies: A meta-analysis of propensity score-matched observational studies

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY

We explored the current evidence available on total arterial revascularization (TAR) carrying out a meta-analysis of propensity score-matched studies comparing TAR versus non-TAR strategy.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched for propensity score-matched studies comparing TAR vs non-TAR. The generic inverse variance method was used to compute the combined hazard ratio (HR) of long-term mortality. The Der-Simonian and Laird method were used to compute the combined risk ratio (RR) of 30-day mortality, deep sternal wound infection, and reoperation for bleeding.

RESULTS

Eighteen TAR vs non-TAR matched populations were included. Meta-analysis showed a significant benefit in terms of long-term survival of the TAR group over the non-TAR group (HR: 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.68-0.78). Better long-term survival over non-TAR strategy was confirmed by both subgroups: TAR with the bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) and TAR without BIMA. Meta-regression suggests that TAR may offer a higher protective survival effect in diabetic patients (coefficient: -0.0063; 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.0006), when carried out with BIMA (coefficient: -0.15; 95% CI: -0.27 to -0.03) or using three arterial conduits (coefficient: -0.12; 95% CI: -0.25 to 0.007). A TAR strategy carried out using BIMA, differently from TAR without BIMA, increases the risk of deep sternal infection (RR: 1.44; 95% CI: 1.17-1.77).

CONCLUSIONS

TAR provides a long-term survival benefit compared with the non-TAR strategy. Also, compared with TAR without BIMA, TAR with BIMA may offer a higher protective long-term survival effect at the expense of a higher risk of sternal deep wound infection.