Impacts of incomplete revascularization following off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting on clinical outcomes of patients with triple-vessel lesions: insights from a single-center study of propensity-matched data

The impact of incomplete revascularization on survival in minimal invasive off-pump coronary artery surgery: a propensity score analysis of 1,149 cases

Background

Minimally invasive concepts are increasingly influential in modern cardiac surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of completeness of revascularization on clinical outcomes and overall survival in minimally invasive, thoracoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated a consecutive series of 1,149 patients who underwent minimally invasive off-pump CABG with single, double, or triple-vessel revascularization between 2007 and 2018. Of these patients, 185 (16.1%) had incomplete revascularization (IR) (group I), and 964 (83.9%) had complete revascularization (CR) (group C). We used gradient boosted propensity score estimation to account for possible confounding variables.

Results

Median age was 69 years, interquartile range (IQR) 60-76 years, and median EuroSCORE II was 4, IQR 2-7. Of the 1,149 patients, 495 patients suffered from two vessel disease (VD) and 353 presented with three VD. Long-term median follow-up 5.58 (3.27-8.48) years was available for 1,089 patients (94.8%). The incidence of recurrent or persisting angina, myocardial infarction, redo-bypass surgery, and stroke during follow-up did not differ significantly between groups. During follow-up, there were 47 deaths in group I and 172 deaths in group C. The 1-, 3-, 5-, 8-, and 10-year unadjusted survival rates were 94%, 84%, 75%, 62%, and 51% for group I, and 97%, 94%, 88%, 77%, and 72% for group C, respectively (long-rank test P<0.001), favouring CR. Following risk adjustment the long-rank test P value for survival was 0.23.

Conclusions

In minimally invasive coronary surgery, IR resulted in decreased long-term survival, but did not achieve statistical significance after risk adjustment. However, IR should only be used in carefully selected cases.

What does complete revascularization mean in 2021? - Definitions, implications, and biases

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Coronary revascularization is known to be an excellent treatment for coronary artery disease. However, whether incomplete myocardial revascularization compromises long-term outcomes, as compared to complete revascularization (CR), remains contentious. Herein, we review the concept of and evidence on CR/incomplete revascularization (ICR) and discuss future perspectives.

RECENT FINDINGS

When possible, achieving CR in coronary artery bypass grafting is desirable; nonetheless, ICR is also a reasonable option to balance the therapeutic benefits against the risks.

SUMMARY

Although angiography-based assessment currently remains the standard of care, fractional flow reserve guidance may reduce the number of lesions requiring revascularization, which may be helpful for an appropriate surgical revascularization strategy. In particular, utilizing this approach may refine hybrid revascularization procedures, especially among high-risk patients.