Total Arterial Revascularization: Bypassing Antiquated Notions to Better Alternatives for Coronary Artery Disease

The Role of Stem Cells in the Treatment of Cardiovascular Diseases

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the leading cause of death and include several vascular and cardiac disorders, such as atherosclerosis, coronary artery disease, cardiomyopathies, and heart failure. Multiple treatment strategies exist for CVDs, but there is a need for regenerative treatment of damaged heart. Stem cells are a broad variety of cells with a great differentiation potential that have regenerative and immunomodulatory properties. Multiple studies have evaluated the efficacy of stem cells in CVDs, such as mesenchymal stem cells and induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes. These studies have demonstrated that stem cells can improve the left ventricle ejection fraction, reduce fibrosis, and decrease infarct size. Other studies have investigated potential methods to improve the survival, engraftment, and functionality of stem cells in the treatment of CVDs. The aim of the present review is to summarize the current evidence on the role of stem cells in the treatment of CVDs, and how to improve their efficacy.

Multi-arterial and total-arterial coronary revascularization: Past, present, and future perspective

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY

Although abundant biological, clinical, and scientific evidence exists on the superiority of multi-arterial (MAR) and total-arterial revascularization (TAR) over the conventional strategy with a single internal thoracic artery, only 10% of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in the United States receives a second arterial conduit, and only 5% of patients receives TAR.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In January 2020, the authors performed comprehensive search to identify studies that evaluated MAR and TAR strategies through the MEDLINE database.

CONCLUSIONS

In this paper, the authors reviewed the literature on the historical and current evidence in favor of MAR and TAR, thus underlying why current CABG practice needs qualitative improvement.

Internal mammary harvesting: Techniques and evidence from the literature

Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) is one of the most commonly performed cardiac surgeries in the world. CABG using the internal mammary artery (IMA) remains the gold standard intervention for myocardial intervention in multivessel coronary artery disease. IMA harvesting can be performed with various techniques and approaches: pedicled vs skeletonized harvesting technique as well as approaches such as conventional sternotomy, robotic and endoscopic approaches. While each technique and approach have their respective advantages and disadvantages, evidence remains varied between cohorts. Traditionally, IMA has been used as an in situ conduit; however, IMA free grafts also provide satisfactory outcomes in certain situations. This literature review aims to explore the efficacy of different techniques and approaches of IMA harvesting and grafting. With evidence compiled, this will provide an overview of the complexity of CABG and locate gaps in current literature to direct future research.

Stem Cells in Cardiovascular Medicine: Historical Overview and Future Prospects

Cardiovascular diseases remain the leading cause of death in the developed world, accounting for more than 30% of all deaths. In a large proportion of these patients, acute myocardial infarction is usually the first manifestation, which might further progress to heart failure. In addition, the human heart displays a low regenerative capacity, leading to a loss of cardiomyocytes and persistent tissue scaring, which entails a morbid pathologic sequela. Novel therapeutic approaches are urgently needed. Stem cells, such as induced pluripotent stem cells or embryonic stem cells, exhibit great potential for cell-replacement therapy and an excellent tool for disease modeling, as well as pharmaceutical screening of novel drugs and their cardiac side effects. This review article covers not only the origin of stem cells but tries to summarize their translational potential, as well as potential risks and clinical translation.

A comparative review of the outcomes of using arterial versus venous conduits in coronary artery bypass graft (CABG)

Nowadays one of the most frequent reasons of death in the world is coronary artery disease. CABG is a portion of a common revascularization mediation that is done to supervise CAD by applying vessels that are grafted to revascularize vessels distal from the blockage. Different sources of grafts are included veins (specifically saphenous) and arteries (include mammary and radial arteries). Multiple conduits are used to this end, but the most suitable is left internal mammary artery (LIMA) to the left anterior descending artery (LAD) as a golden standard. Saphenous vein grafts were the guiding approach applied by the vast majority of cardiac surgeons in the 1970s, even though all approaches were supported by doctors. Although the radial artery graft was introduced simultaneously, this approach due to its complications was not as prevalent. This article is aimed to define the pros and cons of applying each kind of grafts according to the results furnished by existent studies. It has also examined the benefits provided by total arterial coronary artery bypass graft against CABG including venous graft for patients with CAD from the perspective of surgeons.

Coronary-subclavian steal syndrome, an easily overlooked entity in interventional cardiology

Coronary-subclavian steal syndrome (CSSS) is a severe complication of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery with internal mammary artery grafting. It is caused by functional graft failure due to a hemodynamically significant proximal subclavian artery stenosis. In this manuscript, we provide a comprehensive review of literature and we report a series of five consecutive CSSS cases. This case series illustrates the variable clinical presentation, thereby emphasizing the importance of raised awareness concerning this pathology in CABG patients.

Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Compared With Minimally Invasive Bypass Surgery for the Left Anterior Descending Coronary Artery Disease: 12-Month Follow up

THE AIM

Evaluates long-term clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) versus minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) surgery for the treatment of left anterior descending (LAD) lesions.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this single-center study were included 130 patients with stable angina and significant (≥ 70 %) LAD disease. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to PCI with everolimus-eluting BVS (n=65) or MIDCAB (n=65). The primary end-point was major adverse cerebro-cardiovascular events (MACCE) and secondary was scaffold (graft) thrombosis at 1 year. The groups of patients were comparable for all baseline demographic, clinical and angiographic parameters. MACCE at 12 month occurred in 9.2 % of patients in the BVS group and in 4.6 % of patients in the MIDCAB group (p=0.3). There was no significant difference between the groups in rates of all cause death (1.5 % vs 1.5 %, p=1.0), myocardial infarction (3.1 % vs. 6.1 %, p=0.4), any revascularization (1.5 % vs. 6.1 %, p=0.1) and scaffold (graft) thrombosis (1.5 % vs. 1.5 %, p=1.00).

CONCLUSION

At 12-month follow up, there was no significant difference in the rate of MACCE between PCI by BVS and MIDCAB in patients with isolated LAD lesions.

Total Arterial Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A 10-Year Experience

Background:

Arterial grafts had better mid-term and long-term patency than saphenous vein grafts in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). We summarized our experience with total arterial off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB) and assessed the early clinical results, surgical complications, and follow-up.

Methods:

From January 2007 to May 2017, 508 coronary artery disease patients undergoing total arterial OPCAB were enrolled. Clinical features, approaches, outcomes of surgical treatments, and follow-up data of these patients were studied retrospectively. A total of 122 patients underwent single left internal mammary artery (IMA)-left anterior descending artery grafts, whereas the other 386 patients underwent multiple vessel grafts.

Results:

The average distal anastomosis was 2.34 ± 0.97 (range: 1–4). All the patients were discharged from hospital except one died. A total of 457 (90.32%) patients were followed up. In the 4-, 7-, and 10-year follow-up groups, the rate of death from any cause was 1.19%, 6.47%, and 10.67%; rate of cardiac death was 0.60%, 2.88%, and 3.33%; rate of repeat revascularization was 0.00%, 3.60%, and 8.67%; rate of ischemic symptoms was 1.79%, 7.91%, and 11.33%; and incidence of stroke was 2.38%, 4.32%, and 6.67%, respectively. Poor medication adherence was observed in 9.38% of the follow-up population.

Conclusions:

Total arterial OPCAB with bilateral IMA, radial artery, and right gastroepiploic artery grafting yielded satisfactory early and midterm outcomes in this patient group, without a significant increase in early mortality or morbidity. Moreover, the long-term outcomes are also positive.

Clinical Effect and Prognosis of Off-Pump Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass

Background

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is a common procedure to circumvent the obstruction of coronary arteries when stents are unsuitable. CABG is a very traumatic surgery that requires redirecting blood flow to an external pump. Thus, this procedure has many risks during and after surgery, and minimizing these risks would greatly benefit the patients.

Material/Methods

We selected 126 patients with coronary artery syndrome and who were unsuitable for stent percutaneous coronary intervention. The observation group received minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB), while the control group was treated with off-pump CABG.

Results

Blood markers and echocardiography before and after treatment improved equally in both groups. Neither group exhibited obvious adverse reactions, or liver and kidney function damage. However, surgical bleeding and postoperative observation days were significantly reduced in the MIDCAB group. Death and cardiac shock at the end of follow-up were significantly lower in the MIDCAB group.

Conclusions

Overall, the clinical benefits of MIDCAB and OP-CABG were similar, but MIDCAB significantly reduced postoperative hospital stay and intraoperative blood transfusion, and improved clinical prognosis.