Utilization of Vein Grafts in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Reasons and Outcomes in a Bilateral Mammary Artery First Center

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Andreas Schaefer, Tim Knochenhauer, Jens Brickwedel, Beate Reiter, Svante Zipfel, Yvonne Schneeberger, Hermann Reichenspurner, Bjoern Sill
{"title":"Utilization of Vein Grafts in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Reasons and Outcomes in a Bilateral Mammary Artery First Center","authors":"Andreas Schaefer,&nbsp;Tim Knochenhauer,&nbsp;Jens Brickwedel,&nbsp;Beate Reiter,&nbsp;Svante Zipfel,&nbsp;Yvonne Schneeberger,&nbsp;Hermann Reichenspurner,&nbsp;Bjoern Sill","doi":"10.1155/2024/3443680","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n <p><i>Objectives</i>. Despite guideline recommendations for use of bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), a large proportion of patients still receive saphenous vein grafts (SVG). We herein aimed to identify reasons for SVG use at a center with a BIMA utilization rate between 60 and 70% and compare outcomes of patients undergoing CABG with either BIMA or left internal mammary artery (LIMA) plus SVG. <i>Methods</i>. Between 2013 and 2022, 4145 consecutive patients underwent isolated CABG at our center. Of those, 2067 patients received BIMA (group 1) and 1206 patients received LIMA/SVG (group 2). A propensity score-matched analysis was performed to adjust for baseline differences. <i>Results</i>. Group 2 presented with higher age, more female patients, and more patients with acute coronary syndrome including NSTEMI/STEMI with more urgent/emergency CABG. In unadjusted analysis group 2 presented adverse 30-day outcomes compared to group 1 with a higher mortality (18/2067, 0.9% vs. 34/1206, 2.8%; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), higher rate of re-revascularization (52/2067, 2.5% vs. 50/1206, 4.1%; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), more stroke (20/2067; 1.0% vs. 33/1206, 2.7%; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), and more postoperative renal failure (17/2067, 0.8% vs. 27/1206, 2.2%; <i>p</i> = 0.001). After adjustment for baseline characteristics, 30-day outcomes were comparable. <i>Conclusions</i>. After adjustment for baseline characteristics no differences in outcomes were found between groups suggesting a safe applicability of BIMA even in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing urgent/emergency CABG. Reasons for SVG use were higher age, female gender, and acute coronary syndrome with urgent/emergency CABG. Outcomes of both groups were excellent with low rates of primary endpoints.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15367,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiac Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2024/3443680","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiac Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/3443680","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives. Despite guideline recommendations for use of bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), a large proportion of patients still receive saphenous vein grafts (SVG). We herein aimed to identify reasons for SVG use at a center with a BIMA utilization rate between 60 and 70% and compare outcomes of patients undergoing CABG with either BIMA or left internal mammary artery (LIMA) plus SVG. Methods. Between 2013 and 2022, 4145 consecutive patients underwent isolated CABG at our center. Of those, 2067 patients received BIMA (group 1) and 1206 patients received LIMA/SVG (group 2). A propensity score-matched analysis was performed to adjust for baseline differences. Results. Group 2 presented with higher age, more female patients, and more patients with acute coronary syndrome including NSTEMI/STEMI with more urgent/emergency CABG. In unadjusted analysis group 2 presented adverse 30-day outcomes compared to group 1 with a higher mortality (18/2067, 0.9% vs. 34/1206, 2.8%; p < 0.001), higher rate of re-revascularization (52/2067, 2.5% vs. 50/1206, 4.1%; p < 0.001), more stroke (20/2067; 1.0% vs. 33/1206, 2.7%; p < 0.001), and more postoperative renal failure (17/2067, 0.8% vs. 27/1206, 2.2%; p = 0.001). After adjustment for baseline characteristics, 30-day outcomes were comparable. Conclusions. After adjustment for baseline characteristics no differences in outcomes were found between groups suggesting a safe applicability of BIMA even in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing urgent/emergency CABG. Reasons for SVG use were higher age, female gender, and acute coronary syndrome with urgent/emergency CABG. Outcomes of both groups were excellent with low rates of primary endpoints.

Abstract Image

冠状动脉旁路移植术中静脉移植物的使用:双侧乳腺动脉第一中心的原因和结果
目的。尽管指南建议在冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)中使用双侧乳内动脉(BIMA),但仍有很大一部分患者接受了大隐静脉移植术(SVG)。我们在此旨在确定一个 BIMA 使用率介于 60% 和 70% 之间的中心使用 SVG 的原因,并比较接受 BIMA 或左乳内动脉 (LIMA) 加 SVG 的 CABG 患者的预后。方法。2013 年至 2022 年间,我中心连续有 4145 例患者接受了孤立的 CABG 手术。其中,2067 名患者接受了 BIMA(第 1 组),1206 名患者接受了 LIMA/SVG(第 2 组)。我们进行了倾向评分匹配分析,以调整基线差异。结果显示第 2 组患者年龄较大,女性患者较多,急性冠状动脉综合征(包括 NSTEMI/STEMI)患者较多,急诊/紧急 CABG 患者较多。在未经调整的分析中,第 2 组与第 1 组相比,30 天不良预后较高,死亡率较高(18/2067,0.9% vs. 34/1206,2.8%;P<0.001),血管再通率较高(52/2067,2.5% vs. 50/1206,2.8%;P<0.001)。5% vs. 50/1206, 4.1%; p<0.001)、更多中风(20/2067; 1.0% vs. 33/1206, 2.7%; p<0.001)和更多术后肾衰竭(17/2067, 0.8% vs. 27/1206, 2.2%; p=0.001)。对基线特征进行调整后,30 天的结果具有可比性。结论。对基线特征进行调整后,各组间的结果没有差异,这表明即使是急性冠状动脉综合征患者接受紧急/急诊 CABG,BIMA 也是安全的。使用 SVG 的原因是年龄较大、女性和急性冠状动脉综合征急诊/紧急 CABG 患者。两组患者的疗效都很好,主要终点的发生率都很低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
12.50%
发文量
976
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Cardiac Surgery (JCS) is a peer-reviewed journal devoted to contemporary surgical treatment of cardiac disease. Renown for its detailed "how to" methods, JCS''s well-illustrated, concise technical articles, critical reviews and commentaries are highly valued by dedicated readers worldwide. With Editor-in-Chief Harold Lazar, MD and an internationally prominent editorial board, JCS continues its 20-year history as an important professional resource. Editorial coverage includes biologic support, mechanical cardiac assist and/or replacement and surgical techniques, and features current material on topics such as OPCAB surgery, stented and stentless valves, endovascular stent placement, atrial fibrillation, transplantation, percutaneous valve repair/replacement, left ventricular restoration surgery, immunobiology, and bridges to transplant and recovery. In addition, special sections (Images in Cardiac Surgery, Cardiac Regeneration) and historical reviews stimulate reader interest. The journal also routinely publishes proceedings of important international symposia in a timely manner.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信