Coronary artery bypass graft surgery using the radial artery as a secondary conduit improves patient survival

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.

Radial Artery Versus Right Internal Thoracic Artery Versus Saphenous Vein as the Second Conduit for Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery: A Network Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcomes

Background

There remains uncertainty regarding the second‐best conduit after the internal thoracic artery in coronary artery bypass grafting. Few studies directly compared the clinical results of the radial artery (RA), right internal thoracic artery (RITA), and saphenous vein (SV). No network meta‐analysis has compared these 3 strategies.

Methods and Results

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for adjusted observational studies and randomized controlled trials comparing the RA, SV, and/or RITA as the second conduit for coronary artery bypass grafting. The primary end point was all‐cause long‐term mortality. Secondary end points were operative mortality, perioperative stroke, perioperative myocardial infarction, and deep sternal wound infection (DSWI). Pairwise and network meta‐analyses were performed. A total of 149 902 patients (4 randomized, 31 observational studies) were included (RA, 16 201, SV, 112 018, RITA, 21 683). At NMA, the use of SV was associated with higher long‐term mortality compared with the RA (incidence rate ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.12–1.34) and RITA (incidence rate ratio, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.17–1.35). The risk of DSWI for SV was similar to RA but lower than RITA (odds ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.55–0.91). There were no differences for any outcome between RITA and RA, although DSWI trended higher with RITA (odds ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.92–2.1). The risk of DSWI in bilateral internal thoracic artery studies was higher when the skeletonization technique was not used.

Conclusions

The use of the RA or the RITA is associated with a similar and statistically significant long‐term clinical benefit compared with the SV. There are no differences in operative risk or complications between the 2 arterial conduits, but DSWI remains a concern with bilateral ITA when skeletonization is not used.

Radial artery versus saphenous vein as the second conduit for coronary artery bypass surgery: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Individual studies may be limited by sample size to detect differences in late survival between radial artery (RA) or saphenous vein graft (SVG) as a second conduit for coronary artery bypass surgery. Here we undertook a meta-analysis of the best evidence available on the comparison of early and late clinical outcomes of the RA and the SVG.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for studies comparing use of the RA versus SVG for isolated coronary artery bypass surgery. Time-to-event outcomes for long-term mortality, repeat revascularization, and myocardial infarction (MI) were extracted as incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95%confidence intervals (95% CI). Odds ratios (OR) were extracted for perioperative mortality, stroke, and MI. A random effects meta-analysis was performed. Sensitivity analyses included leave-one-out-analyses and meta-regression.

RESULTS

Among 1201 articles, 14 studies (20,931 patients) were included (mean follow-up: 6.6 years). Operative mortality was 1.25% in the RA versus 1.33% in the SVG group (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.68-1.28). No difference in perioperative MI (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.59-1.56) or stroke (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.43-1.13) was found between RA and SVG. Long-term mortality (mean follow-up 6.6 years) was 24.5% in RA versus 34.2% in SVG group (IRR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.63-0.87, P < .001). No difference in follow-up MI or repeat revascularization was found (IRR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.42-1.36 and IRR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.42-1.09 respectively). At meta-regression, RA survival advantage was independent of age, sex, diabetes, and ventricular function.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the SVG, using the RA as the second conduit is associated with a 26% relative risk reduction in mortality at 6.6-year follow-up.

The radial artery: a forgotten conduit

We reviewed the published literature on the clinical and angiographic outcome of radial artery (RA) grafts and on the comparison between the RA and the other conduits used in coronary operations. The RA is a better graft than the saphenous vein and comparable to the right internal thoracic artery (RITA); moreover, the RA seems a better choice than the RITA in patients at risk of sternal or pulmonary complications. We conclude that the RA should be preferred to the saphenous vein and considered at least equivalent to the RITA as the second conduit during every elective coronary artery bypass procedure.

The effect of patient sex on survival in patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass surgery receiving a radial artery

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether patient sex makes a difference to in-hospital mortality and survival in patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) receiving a radial artery graft.

METHODS

Analysis of consecutive patients on a validated prospective cardiac surgery database was performed for patients undergoing isolated CABG. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed for in-hospital mortality and long-term survival. A propensity analysis was also performed.

RESULTS

Overall mortality was 2.1% (n = 284) for all cases, n = 13 369. Median follow-up was 7.0 (interquartile range 4.1-10.1) years. Of the cases 28.2% of males (n = 384) and 29.7% of females (n = 764) had a radial artery utilized. Univariate analysis demonstrated that in-hospital mortality was significantly lower in male patients, P < 0.001, and radial artery use was associated with increased survival in males, P < 0.0001, but not in females, P = 0.82. In male patients, multivariate analysis failed to identify the radial artery as a risk factor for in-hospital death. The radial artery was identified as a significant prognostic factor, associated with improved long-term survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-0.88, P = 0.0001). Propensity analysis confirmed this finding (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67-0.86, P < 0.0001). In female patients, multivariate analysis failed to identify the radial artery as a significant factor determining in-hospital mortality or long-term survival. Propensity analysis confirmed these findings.

CONCLUSION

Males derive a significant survival advantage if they receive a radial artery graft when undergoing isolated CABG. The radial artery makes no difference to long-term survival in female patients. Radial artery use does not affect in-hospital mortality regardless of patient sex.