Single Internal Thoracic Artery Research Articles

Deep Sternal Wound Infection After Beating Heart Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery with Routine Use of Skeletonized Bilateral Internal Thoracic Artery.

Despite its survival benefits, bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) grafting is not commonly utilized due to concerns over deep sternal wound infection (DSWI). We observed the role of routine use of BITA and off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCABG) in the incidence of DSWI and associated risk factors. Between January 2010 and December 2020, 1,207 patients were treated with isolated coronary artery bypass grafting. In all cases, OPCABG was attempted, and BITA was used whenever there was a need for a second arterial graft for the left coronary artery. DSWI was defined as a wound infection requiring surgical intervention and/or the administration of antibiotics. Multiple linear regression analysis was employed to model the risk of DSWI. The incidence of DSWI was 0.58%. Mortality rate was higher in DSWI group than in no-DSWI group (28.57% vs. 1.25%; P<0.001). No significant difference in DSWI incidence was observed when BITA (70.6%) or single internal thoracic artery (29.4%) were used (P=0.680). The prevalence of diabetes (100% vs. 40.7%; P=0.001), hyperlipidemia (100% vs. 85.9%; P=0.045), and obesity (71.4% vs. 26.8%; P-0.017) was significantly elevated in DSWI group, when compared with no-DSWI group. Diabetes (P=0.0001), unstable angina (P=0.0064), previous myocardial infarction > 30 days (P=0.0009), left ventricular ejection fraction < 50% (P=0.0074), and emergency surgery (P=0.0002) were independent risk factors. The results of routine use of skeletonized BITA after OPCABG were satisfactory regarding DSWI incidence and operative mortality in a single-center experience.

Bilateral versus Single Internal Thoracic Artery Grafting Strategies Supplemented by Radial Artery Grafting.

It is unclear if a second or third arterial graft can improve clinical outcomes in coronary artery bypass graft surgery. We compared the outcomes of bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) plus radial artery (RA) grafting versus left internal thoracic artery (LITA) plus RA grafting after off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. Between January 2009 and December 2020, a total of 3007 patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease who underwent off-pump coronary artery bypass were analyzed. Among them, 971 patients received total arterial grafting using LITA. We divided the patients into two groups [group A, BITA+RA grafting (n=227) and group B, LITA+RA grafting (n=744)], and compared the survival and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) rates between the two groups at 10 years. After risk adjustment with inverse probability treatment weighting methods, the freedom from all-cause mortality was 93.1% and 88.3% in groups A and B, respectively (p=0.140). The freedom from MACCE rates were 68.3% and 89.0%, respectively (p<0.0001). LITA plus RA grafting [hazard ratio (HR): 1.3, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.05-2.37, p=0.025] and incomplete revascularization (HR 1.2, 95% CI: 0.70-2.15, p=0.046) were significant risk factors for MACCEs in multivariable Cox regression analysis. The rates of MACCEs were lower with LITA plus RA grafting than with BITA plus RA grafting in total arterial revascularization. Furthermore, complete revascularization improved long-term outcomes following total arterial grafting.

Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery with Bilateral Internal Mammary Arteries in Left Main Coronary Artery Disease. Is There Any Benefit in 10-Year Mortality?

Background: The randomized controlled trials comparing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) included all types of surgical techniques (on-pump and off-pump) and different conduits (arterial and venous). Is it reasonable to assume that all surgical techniques are equal in terms of late mortality? Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether off-pump CABG surgery using both mammary arteries provides additional benefit over conventional revascularization using single mammary artery in terms of long-term survival for left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, observational and comparative study (n=723) adjusted for risk. A stratified analysis was performed according to the use of single internal thoracic artery (SITA, n=144) or bilateral internal thoracic arteries (BITA, n=579) analyzing survival at 10 years after the intervention. Results: Survival at 10 years was significantly higher in BITA group (79.0%±3.4% vs 67.0%±4.9%, log-rank test, p &lt;0.01). This advantage was also observed in the risk-adjusted analysis (93.0%±4.6 vs 69.0%±5.7 respectively, p=0.03). The use of BITA was an independent predictor of 10-year survival (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.37-0.87, p=0.01). Conclusion: The use of bilateral internal mammary arteries in patients with left main coronary artery disease undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting was associated with higher survival at 10 years.

Impact of Second Arterial Conduit on Outcomes Following Coronary Bypass Grafting.

The aim of this study was to compare short-term outcomes and long-term survival in patients following coronary artery bypass grafting in whom second arterial conduit or saphenous vein was used as well as to find out the most optimal second arterial graft. Between January 2006 and June 2018, 7,857 patients met the inclusion criteria and were divided into two groups: single internal thoracic artery (SITA) + Vein group (n = 7,140) and second arterial conduit group (n = 717), of these 537 patients received right internal thoracic artery (RITA) and 180 patients received radial artery (RA). We obtained 701 propensity-matched pairs for final comparison. Short-term outcomes included: 30-day mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (MACCE), reoperation for bleeding, and deep sternal wound infection (DSWI). The long-term outcome was all-cause mortality. No significant differences were observed between second arterial conduit versus SITA + Vein groups and between RITA versus RA groups in terms of 30-day mortality, 30-day MACCE, reoperation for bleeding, and incidence of DSWI in the matched cohort. The use of second arterial conduit was associated with a significant reduction in long-term mortality by 24% in the matched cohort (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60-0.96; p = 0.02). RA and RITA as second arterial conduit had comparable long-term mortality (HR: 1.12; 95% CI: 0.69-1.82; p = 0.62). The use of second arterial conduit, irrespective of type, is safe and associated with improved long-term survival compared with the second venous aortocoronary graft.

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

The optimal choice of graft material in patients ≥70years 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 ≥70years 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 3months 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 ≥70years of age as late clinical benefits are expected to manifest themselves readily within a few years after surgery.

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

ObjectivesWe 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. MethodsPubMed, 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. ResultsTwelve 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). ConclusionsThe 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 [Display omitted]

Impact of transit-time flow measurement on early postoperative outcomes in total arterial coronary revascularization with internal thoracic arteries: a propensity score analysis on 910 patients.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of transit-time flow measurement (TTFM) on early postoperative outcomes in total arterial coronary revascularization. A single-centre retrospective analysis was conducted on 910 patients undergoing isolated total arterial coronary artery bypass grafting with internal thoracic arteries (ITAs) at our institution, between January 2017 and February 2020. Complete arterial revascularization with bilateral ITAs with a Y-configuration, or single ITA, was planned for all patients. According to the surgeon preference, TTFM was assessed in 430 patients (TTFM group). They were compared with 480 patients without TTFM assessment (no TTFM group). Primary end point was the occurrence of in-hospital major cardiac adverse events (MACE). A propensity score analysis with an inverse probability weighting approach was performed to control for selection bias. TTFM was associated with longer cardiopulmonary bypass times (76.0 [62.0; 91.2] vs 79.0 [65.0; 94.0] min, P = 0.042). Six (1.4%) patients in the TTFM group versus no patient in the no TTFM group underwent intraoperative graft revision because of unsatisfying flow values (P = 0.011). MACE were significantly lower in the TTFM group (14, 3.3%) than in the no TTFM group (33, 6.9%, P = 0.014). At crude regression, TTFM was protective against MACE occurrence (odds ratios 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.23-0.85, P = 0.016). Inverse probability weighting adjustment did not significantly displace P-values and odds ratios for MACE occurrence in the TTFM group 0.44, 95% confidence interval 0.28-0.69, P < 0.001. Even if associated with longer cardiopulmonary bypass times, intraoperative graft flow measurement with TTFM reduces MACE occurrence and it should be recommended for graft evaluation in arterial coronary artery bypass grafting surgery.

Radial Artery Versus Saphenous Vein as Third Conduit in Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: a Ten-Year Literature Review.

Coronary artery bypass grafting is the gold standard strategy for obtaining complete coronary revascularization in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. The recent AHA and EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization recommend total arterial revascularization, especially in younger patients, whenever possible. However, the use of saphenous vein grafts in association with single or bilateral internal thoracic artery (SITA, BITA) instead of arterial grafts (radial arteries, right gastroepiploic artery and inferior epigastric artery) is widespread. We analyzed literature from the last ten years (January 2010 to December 2020) looking for evidence in favour of the use of a radial artery compared to a saphenous vein in association with BITA. We identified nine studies (4 Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses and 6 large cohort observational studies with propensity score-matching) that compared arterial with saphenous grafts as third conduit. The main finding of the review is the higher rate of freedom from any cardiac adverse event in the population which reached Total Arterial myocardial Revascularization (TAR). A probable reason for the limited application of TAR as a strategy is the shortage of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs). (www.actabiomedica.it)

Bilateral internal thoracic artery coronary grafting: risks and benefits in elderly patients.

Whether bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) grafting benefits elderly patients in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains unclear since they tend to have a limited life expectancy and severe comorbidities. We aim to evaluate the outcomes of BITA vs. single internal thoracic artery (SITA) grafting in elderly patients. A meta-analysis was performed by database searching until May 2021. Studies comparing BITA and SITA grafting among elderly patients were included. One randomized controlled trial, nine propensity score matching, and six unmatched studies were identified, with a total of 18146 patients (7422 received BITA grafting and 10724 received SITA grafting). Compared with SITA grafting, BITA grafting had a higher risk of deep sternal wound infection (DSWI) [odds ratio: 1.67; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.22-2.28], and this risk could not be significantly reduced by the skeletonization technique. Meanwhile, BITA grafting was associated with a higher long-term survival [hazard ratio: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.77-0.90], except for the octogenarian subgroup. Reconstructed Kaplan-Meier survival curves revealed 4-year, 8-year, and 12-year overall survival rates of 85.5%, 66.7%, and 45.3%, respectively, in the BITA group and 79.3%, 58.6%, and 34.9%, respectively, in the SITA group. No significant difference was observed in early mortality, perioperative myocardial infarction, perioperative cerebral vascular accidents, or re-exploration for bleeding. Compared with SITA grafting, BITA grafting could provide a long-term survival benefit for elderly patients, although this benefit remained uncertain in octogenarians. Meanwhile, elderly patients who received BITA were associated with a higher risk of DSWI and such a risk could not be eliminated by the skeletonization technique.

Bilateral internal thoracic artery use in two-vessel disease does not increase the perioperative risk—A propensity score matched analysis

BackgroundBilateral internal thoracic arteries (BITA) are uncommonly used in the every-day practice due to safety concerns and technical challenges with Y-grafts. We hypothesized that in-situ BITA use during coronary artery by-pass grafting (CABG) for two vessel disease is equally safe to standard strategy with left internal thoracic artery-left anterior descending artery revascularization and venous graft to other target vessels.MethodsA propensity score matched analysis was used to compare elective on-pump CABG patients who received in-situ BITA (BITA-group), versus left internal thoracic artery graft to the left anterior descending artery plus vein (SITA-group). Primary end points were 30-days all-cause-mortality, major adverse cardiac events and incidents and deep sternal wound infections.ResultsA total of 50 matched pairs (c-statistics 0.769) were selected from patients operated on between January 2015 and April 2020 using BITA (n = 50) and SITA (n = 2170). There were no inter-group differences in demographics and basic clinical characteristics. The total operation time was longer in the BITA-group (4.0 vs 3.6 hours; p = 0.004). The rate of complete revascularization was similar, as was median aortic cross-clamp time, median extracorporeal circulation time, rate of re-explorations for bleeding, deep sternal wound infections or length of stay. One patient died in BITA group, 3 days after surgery, from a non-cardiac cause. After 36 months, the survival rate was 98% for BITA-group and 96% for controls (log-rank, p = 0.577).ConclusionsIn-situ use of BITA during coronary revascularization for two-vessel disease is as safe and effective, as use of single ITA and vein graft. In-situ strategy abolishes allows to avoid the technically demanding composite graft configuration.

Science, Medicine, and the Anesthesiologist

Science, Medicine, and the Anesthesiologist

Additional survival benefit of bilateral in situ internal thoracic artery grafting with composite radial artery graft in total arterial off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting

ObjectiveThis study aimed to elucidate whether the use of bilateral internal thoracic arteries (BITAs) confers additional survival benefits compared with a single internal thoracic artery (SITA) in total arterial grafting with the radial artery. MethodsBetween 2002 and 2016, 617 patients underwent a bilateral in situ internal thoracic artery grafting with the radial artery as a composite I-graft (BITA-I group) and 516 patients underwent single in situ internal thoracic artery grafting with the radial artery as a composite Y-graft (SITA-Y group). All anastomoses were performed without cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic manipulation. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust covariates and compared the outcomes between the 2 groups. Subanalysis was also performed to evaluate the effects of the BITA-I group on survival according to the covariates using Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. ResultsPropensity score matching yielded 348 well-matched pairs. Early postoperative outcomes were similar in the 2 groups. The BITA-I group showed significantly better survival than the SITA-Y group (79.3% vs 70.2% at 10 years, P = .015). The subanalysis revealed a significantly better survival in the BITA-I group among overall patients (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-0.93). There was a significant positive effect on survival in the BITA-I group among patients without comorbidities or those aged <77 years. ConclusionsBITA grafting with the radial artery provides better long-term survival than SITA grafting with the radial artery, which is enhanced among patients aged <77 years with minimum comorbidities.

Bilateral Internal Thoracic Artery Grafting Improves Survival for Severe Left Ventricular Dysfunction and Diabetes.

In patients with severe left ventricular (LV) dysfunction requiring coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), the association between diabetic status and outcomes after surgery, as well as with survival benefit following bilateral internal thoracic artery (ITA) grafting, remain largely unknown. Patients (n=188; mean [±SD] age 67±9 years) with LV ejection fraction ≤40% who underwent isolated initial CABG were classified into non-diabetic (n=64), non-insulin-dependent diabetic (NIDM; n=74), and insulin-dependent diabetic (IDM; n=50) groups. During follow-up (mean [±SD] 68±47 months), the 5-year survival rate was 84% and 65% among non-diabetic and diabetic patients, respectively (P=0.034). After adjusting for all covariates, both NIDM and IDM were associated with increased mortality, with hazard ratios (HRs) of 1.9 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-3.7; P=0.049) and 2.4 (95% CI 1.2-4.8; P=0.016), respectively. Among non-diabetic patients, there was no difference in the 5-year survival rate between single and bilateral ITA grafting (86% vs. 80%, respectively; P=0.95), whereas bilateral ITA grafting increased survival among diabetic patients (57% vs. 81%; P=0.004). Multivariate analysis revealed that bilateral ITA was significantly associated with a decreased risk of mortality (HR 0.3; 95% CI 0.1-0.8; P=0.024). NIDM and IDM were significantly associated with worse long-term clinical outcome after CABG for severe LV dysfunction. Bilateral ITA grafting has the potential to improve survival in diabetic patients with severe LV dysfunction.

Comparison of Long-term Clinical Outcomes of Skeletonized vs Pedicled Internal Thoracic Artery Harvesting Techniques in the Arterial Revascularization Trial

Recent evidence has suggested that skeletonization of the internal thoracic artery (ITA) is associated with worse clinical outcomes in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG). To compare the long-term clinical outcomes of skeletonized and pedicled ITA for CABG. The Arterial Revascularization Trial (ART) was a 2-group, multicenter trial comparing the use of a bilateral ITA vs a single ITA for CABG at 10 years. Patients in the ART trial were stratified by ITA harvesting technique: skeletonized vs pedicled. Data were collected from June 2004 to December 2017, and data were analyzed from June to July 2021. In this analysis, the 10-year clinical outcomes were compared between patients who received skeletonized vs pedicled ITAs. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes were a composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) including all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and repeated revascularization and a composite including MACE and sternal wound complication (SWC). Cox regression and propensity score matching were used. Of 2161 included patients, 295 (13.7%) were female, and the median (interquartile range) age was 65.0 (58.0-70.0) years. At 10 years, the risk of all-cause mortality was not significantly different between the pedicled and skeletonized groups (hazard ratio [HR], 1.12; 95% CI, 0.92-1.36; P = .27). However, the long-term risks of the secondary outcomes were significantly higher in the skeletonized group compared with the pedicled group (MACE: HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.06-1.47; P = .01; MACE and SWC: HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.05-1.43; P = .01). The difference was not seen when considering only patients operated on by surgeons who enrolled 51 patients or more in the trial (MACE: HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.82-1.39; P = .62; MACE and SWC: HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.80-1.34; P = .78). While the long-term survival of patients was not different between groups, the rate of adverse cardiovascular events was consistently higher in the skeletonized group and the difference was associated with surgeon-related factors. Further evidence on the outcome of skeletonized ITA is needed.

Multi-arterial Coronary Grafting

Arterial conduits, especially internal thoracic arteries (ITAs), are rarely affected by intimal hyperplasia or atherosclerosis, major contributors to early and late vein graft failure. Improved survival and freedom from reintervention with multi-arterial grafting (MAG) are reported in large observational studies, particularly when more than one anatomically important coronary territory is supplied. Several grafting configurations are possible depending on conduit and target characteristics, with the left ITA to the left anterior descending (LITA-LAD) typically being the cornerstone around which the rest of the conduits are constructed. The right ITA (RITA) or radial artery (RA) is used to bypass the second most important target after the LAD. The fundamentals of MAG depend on thorough preoperative evaluation, meticulous surgical technique and intraoperative flow assessment. Pitfalls to avoid include tension in short conduits or kinks in longer ones, poor ITA inflow, competitive native and graft flow, flow imbalance between segments of a composite graft, and sequentially grafting deep intramyocardial targets. Versatility and flexibility are critical in mitigating difficulties or potential complications in MAG. Refinements in complex bilateral ITA (BITA) and RA grafting require a deliberate iterative process that ideally incorporates dedicated training and mentorship by experienced MAG surgeons. Arterial conduits, especially internal thoracic arteries (ITAs), are rarely affected by intimal hyperplasia or atherosclerosis, major contributors to early and late vein graft failure. Improved survival and freedom from reintervention with multi-arterial grafting (MAG) are reported in large observational studies, particularly when more than one anatomically important coronary territory is supplied. Several grafting configurations are possible depending on conduit and target characteristics, with the left ITA to the left anterior descending (LITA-LAD) typically being the cornerstone around which the rest of the conduits are constructed. The right ITA (RITA) or radial artery (RA) is used to bypass the second most important target after the LAD. The fundamentals of MAG depend on thorough preoperative evaluation, meticulous surgical technique and intraoperative flow assessment. Pitfalls to avoid include tension in short conduits or kinks in longer ones, poor ITA inflow, competitive native and graft flow, flow imbalance between segments of a composite graft, and sequentially grafting deep intramyocardial targets. Versatility and flexibility are critical in mitigating difficulties or potential complications in MAG. Refinements in complex bilateral ITA (BITA) and RA grafting require a deliberate iterative process that ideally incorporates dedicated training and mentorship by experienced MAG surgeons. Corrigendum: Multi-arterial Coronary GraftingOperative Techniques in Thoracic and Cardiovascular SurgeryVol. 27Issue 4PreviewThe authors regret that in the article “Multi-arterial Coronary Grafting” by Rami Akhrass and Faisal G. Bakaeen in the Summer 2022 issue (27(2):126-146, 2022; https://doi.org/10.1053/j.optechstcvs.2021.09.001 ), (Figures 2 and 10) included an error with the course of the right internal thoracic artery (RITA). The corrected figures are included on the next 2 pages. Figure 2 was used as the cover image for the issue. In both Figures 2 and 10, the RITA should be anterior to the superior vena cava and posterior to the pulmonary artery. Full-Text PDF Commentary: Multiple Arterial Grafting for Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery: Choosing the Right Conduits for The Right Vessels for The Right PatientsOperative Techniques in Thoracic and Cardiovascular SurgeryVol. 27Issue 2PreviewDespite the known increased patency of arterial versus saphenous vein graft (SVG) conduits for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) surgery, a recent Society of Thoracic Surgery (STS) national database study showed that while a single internal thoracic artery (SITA) graft was used in 89.4% of CABG patients, only 10.6% received multiple arterial grafts (MAG) and only 4.9% had bilateral internal thoracic artery grafts (BITA).1 What are the factors that have discouraged surgeons from embracing MAG and BITA grafting? In a 2018 national survey from the United Kingdom, almost one third of surgeons cited the lack of evidence in favor of MAG and BITA as a limiting factor for not adopting these techniques in their practices. Full-Text PDF Commentary: Time to Set New Standards for Coronary Bypass Surgery?Operative Techniques in Thoracic and Cardiovascular SurgeryVol. 27Issue 2PreviewAsk any cardiac surgeon who started their training in 90s, and you'll find that many of them, at some point, must have thought that surgical coronary revascularization was ill-fated. Especially in the mid 2000s, when drug-eluting stents appeared on the market and furtherly improved the outcomes of percutaneous revascularization1... God knew what would come next! History - and clinical trials - proved them wrong: almost 20 years later, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is still the most common procedure in adult cardiac surgery and remains the gold standard for treatment of complex triple vessel disease and left main disease, particularly in younger patients and in case of diabetes or reduced left ventricular function. Full-Text PDF

Impact of Bilateral versus Single Internal Thoracic Artery Grafting on the Long-Term Survival in Adults: A Systematic Review.

ObjectiveTo analyse the survival of patients who had undergone bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting versus those with single internal thoracic artery grafting from the available literature. Moreover, this study will review the available literature regarding which of the two techniques seems to be the safest with long-term survival and reduced mortality rates.MethodsA literature search of the databases was conducted to retrieve studies that fall under the study design of cohort and randomized controlled clinical trials in English from January 2015 to July 2021. Finally, seven studies were selected: four cohort studies and three other from a randomized trial.ResultsThe cohort studies revealed that bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting is associated with lower mortality rates and better long-term survival outcomes than single internal thoracic artery grafting, while the ART randomized controlled clinical trials showed that there is no significant difference in mortality rates between both the coronary artery bypass grafting techniques. However, all studies concluded that bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting is associated with a higher frequency of deep sternal wound infections.ConclusionThe discrepancy in results between the cohort studies and randomized controlled clinical trial remains persistent. However, the stated advantages of bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting are not strong enough to convince surgeons to alter their practice and the wide magnitude of expectations from the ART study was reckoned as inadequate. This may well be due to the presence of limited criteria for bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting in identifying the impact on survival of extended arterial revascularization, and there is a new colossal expectation from the ongoing randomized trial based on multiple arterial grafting versus single arterial grafting.

Cost-effectiveness of bilateral vs. single internal thoracic artery grafts at 10 years.

AimsUsing bilateral internal thoracic arteries (BITAs) for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been suggested to improve survival compared to CABG using single internal thoracic arteries (SITAs) for patients with advanced coronary artery disease. We used data from the Arterial Revascularization Trial (ART) to assess long-term cost-effectiveness of BITA grafting compared to SITA grafting from an English health system perspective.Methods and resultsResource use, healthcare costs, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were assessed across 10 years of follow-up from an intention-to-treat perspective. Missing data were addressed using multiple imputation. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated with uncertainty characterized using non-parametric bootstrapping. Results were extrapolated beyond 10 years using Gompertz functions for survival and linear models for total cost and utility. Total mean costs at 10 years of follow-up were £17 594 in the BITA arm and £16 462 in the SITA arm [mean difference £1133 95% confidence interval (CI) £239 to £2026, P = 0.015]. Total mean QALYs at 10 years were 6.54 in the BITA arm and 6.57 in the SITA arm (adjusted mean difference −0.01 95% CI −0.2 to 0.1, P = 0.883). At 10 years, BITA grafting had a 33% probability of being cost-effective compared to SITA, assuming a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000. Lifetime extrapolation increased the probability of BITA being cost-effective to 51%.ConclusionsBITA grafting has significantly higher costs but similar quality-adjusted survival at 10 years compared to SITA grafting. Extrapolation suggests this could change over lifetime.

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

BackgroundThe 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. ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the association between age and BITA versus SITA outcomes in the Arterial Revascularization Trial. MethodsThe 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. ResultsAge 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). ConclusionsOur results suggest that BITA may improve long-term outcome in younger patients, although more randomized data are needed to confirm this hypothesis.

Transient time flow measurement in total arterial coronary revascularisation with internal thoracic arteries. Three years’ experience in 433 patients

Intraoperative graft flow measurement in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is recommended, but its clinical impact is still controversial. We evaluated the effect of Transient Time Flow Measurement (TTFM) on Major Cardiac Adverse Events (MACE) in CABG surgery. Between January 2017 and February 2020, 959 patients underwent total arterial CABG with internal thoracic arteries (ITAs). Thirty-four patients with critical preoperative status according Euroscore II definition or redo procedures were excluded from the analysis. According to the surgeon preference, TTFM were assessed in 433 patients (TTFM) with Medistim system ( Fig. 1 ). They were compared with 492 patients without TTFM assessment (No TTFM). Complete arterial revascularisation with single or bilateral ITAs with a Y-configuration was planned for all patients. Patients’ data were extracted from the French Society of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery database (EPICARD). Primary end-point was the occurrence of MACE, including in-hospital cardiac mortality, perioperative myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest and the need for extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Preoperative characteristics, operative data and postoperative outcomes are resumed in Table 1 . TTFM is associated with longer cardio-pulmonary bypass (CPB) times, because of supplementary time needed for measurement (82 ± 24 vs. 78 ± 25 min., P = 0.023). Five patients in TTFM group underwent graft revision because of unsatisfying flow values. MACE were significantly lower in TTFM group (2.1% vs. 5.7%, P < 0.01). At multivariate analysis, TTFM was protective against MACE occurrence (OR 0.353, 95% CI 0.146–0.770, P = 0.013). Other independent risk factors for MACE occurrence were cross clamp time (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.03–1.35, P = 0.016) and Euroscore II (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.13–1.29, P < 0.001). TTFM reduces MACE occurrence and it should be mandatory for graft evaluation in coronary artery surgery.

Bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting in haemodialysis patients with diabetic nephropathy.

To compare postoperative outcomes in patients with diabetic nephropathy receiving haemodialysis and undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) using bilateral or single skeletonized internal thoracic artery (ITA). Among 1441 consecutive patients undergoing isolated CABG between 2002 and 2019 at our university hospital, we retrospectively analysed data for 107 patients with diabetic nephropathy receiving haemodialysis. After inverse probability of treatment weighting, we found no statistically significant differences regarding patients' preoperative characteristics. All patients underwent myocardial revascularization using the off-pump technique. There was no statistical significance in postoperative deep sternal wound infection (P = 0.902) and 30-day mortality (P = 0.755). However, the bilateral ITA group had a lower rate of postoperative stroke versus the single group (0% vs 5.5%, respectively; P = 0.021). Follow-up was completed in 95.3% (102/107) of the patients, and the mean follow-up duration was 3.3 years. Thirty-eight deaths occurred in the bilateral ITA group and 18 in the single ITA group. There was no significant difference in all-cause death (P = 0.558) and cardiac death rates (P = 0.727). Multivariable Cox regression models showed that the independent predictors of all-cause death were age [hazard ratio (HR) 1.031; P = 0.010], previous percutaneous intervention (HR 1.757; P = 0.009) and gastroepiploic artery grafting (HR 0.582; P = 0.026). Bilateral ITA grafting in patients with diabetic nephropathy receiving haemodialysis did not improve mid-term outcomes.