Total arterial off-pump coronary revascularization: The Holy Grail?

Assessing the benefits of anaortic off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting

Introduction

The procedure called the "aorta no-touch" (NT) or anaortic technique in off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB) is designed to reduce the perioperative risk of stroke. We have observed an increased frequency of anaortic OPCAB procedures at our institution. The main purpose of the present study is to investigate the effectiveness of anaortic OPCAB in reducing the perioperative risk of stroke.

Methods

From April 2011 to July 2023, a total of 2,236 patients underwent isolated OPCAB at our single center. The patients were divided into the anaortic group (NT, n = 762) and the aortic group (A, n = 1,474). The NT group was propensity score-matched (PSM) with the A group at a 1:1 ratio (NT n = 640; A n = 640), and matching was performed based on 26 covariates with preoperative clinical characteristics.

Results

In both the unmatched and matched cohorts of the NT and A groups, there were no significant differences observed in new stroke rates (NT vs. A; unmatched, 1.0% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.624; matched, 0.9% vs. 1.3%, p = 0.789). The univariable logistic analysis did not identify the anaortic technique as an independent factor negatively associated with new stroke events (OR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.35-1.86, p = 0.624).

Conclusion

The present study did not find the anaortic technique to reduce the perioperative risk of stroke in OPCAB. Hence, further large studies are needed to identify patient cohorts in which anaortic OPCAB is significantly beneficial.

Is it safe to perform total arterial grafting in elderly patients lacking vein grafts? A single surgeon comparison

OBJECTIVES

The results of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery with total arterial revascularisation (TA-CABG) in elderly patients, who may have insufficient vein graft material for conventional CABG (CO-CABG), have not been fully established. We therefore sought to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of patients >70 years old undergoing CO-CABG and TA-CABG.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective observational study analyzing all consecutive adult patients aged >70 years undergoing first-time CABG over the 15-year period from 2004 to 2020 under a single surgeon. Primary outcomes of interest were in-hospital mortality, long-term mortality, and re-intervention rate. Secondary outcomes of interest included operative durations and the incidence of peri-operative complications.

RESULTS

There were 46 patients (age 76 ± 3 SD) in the TA-CABG group and 145 patients (age 76 ± 4 SD) in the CO-CABG group. Cardio-pulmonary bypass and cross-clamp durations were comparable between groups (p = .11 and p = .23, respectively). Stroke occurred in 1.0% undergoing CO-CABG compared to 0% in the TA-CABG group (p = .42). Hospital mortality was 3.0% with CO-CABG (EuroSCORE; mean [SD] 6.81 (5.81)) and 2.0% with TA-CABG (EuroSCORE; mean [SD] 6.38 (6.57)) (p = .93). On long-term follow-up, myocardial infarction occurred in 10.0% of CO-CABG patients compared to 4.0% of TA-CABG patients (p = .25). Re-intervention rates were 7% following CO-CABG, and 2% after TA-CABG (p = .23). There was no significant difference in long-term mortality between patients undergoing CO-CABG and TA-CABG (47% vs. 57%, p = .27). Long-term survival was comparable between grafting techniques (p = .27).

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences in major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, re-intervention rate, hospital or long-term mortality between CO-CABG and TA-CABG. TA-CABG represents a safe and feasible alternative to CO-CABG in elderly patients offering good long-term outcomes.

The Anaortic Technique with Bilateral Internal Thoracic Artery Grafting - Filling the Gap in Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has consolidated its role as the most effective procedure for treating patients with advanced atherosclerotic coronary artery disease, reducing the long-term risk of myocardial infarction and death compared to other therapies and relieving angina. Despite the recognized benefits afforded by surgical myocardial revascularization, a subset of higher-risk patients bears a more elevated risk of perioperative stroke. Stroke remains the drawback of conventional CABG and has been strongly linked to aortic manipulation (cannulation, cross-clamping, and side-biting clamping for the performance of proximal aortic anastomoses) and the use of cardiopulmonary bypass. Adoption of off-pump CABG (OPCAB) is demonstrated to lower the risk of perioperative stroke, as well as reducing the risk of short-term mortality, renal failure, atrial fibrillation, bleeding, and length of intensive care unit stay. However, increased risk persists owing to the need for the tangential ascending aorta clamping to construct the proximal anastomosis. The concept of anaortic (aorta no-touch) OPCAB (anOPCAB) stems from eliminating ascending aorta manipulation, virtually abolishing the risk of embolism caused by aortic wall debris into the brain circulation. The adoption of anOPCAB has been shown to further decrease the risk of postoperative stroke, especially in higher-risk patients, entailing a step forward and a refinement of outcomes provided by the primeval OPCAB technique. Therefore, anOPCAB has been the recommended technique in patients with cerebrovascular disease and/or calcification or atheromatous plaque in the ascending aorta and should be preferred in patients with high-risk factors for neurological damage and stroke.

Bilateral internal thoracic artery use in coronary artery bypass grafting in the post-ART era - Perspective

There is still lack of convincing evidence about the superiority of bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) use in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and BITA grafts continue to be underutilized. Arterial Revascularization Trial (ART) did not demonstrate the superiority of BITA versus single ITA grafting after 10 years. We have reviewed the most recent literature, assessed the current status as well as indications of BITA grafting in the post-ART era. We believe that BITA grafting is not appropriate for all patients especially in light of the findings of ART. However, the use of BITA is justified in patients of younger age and those without comorbidities (poorly controlled diabetes, obesity, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, previous mediastinal irradiation, long-term steroid use, elderly women). Further prospective randomized studies with long-term follow-up are needed to validate the benefits of BITA grafting.