Premium
Impact of Arterial Revascularization in Patients Undergoing Coronary Bypass
Author(s) -
Nasso Giuseppe,
Popoff Georges,
Lamarra Mauro,
Romano Vito,
Coppola Roberto,
Bartolomucci Francesco,
Giglio Mauro Del,
Romeo Francesco,
Tavazzi Luigi,
Speziale Giuseppe
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
journal of cardiac surgery
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.428
H-Index - 58
eISSN - 1540-8191
pISSN - 0886-0440
DOI - 10.1111/j.1540-8191.2012.01481.x
Subject(s) - medicine , cardiology , revascularization , myocardial infarction , angina , coronary artery disease , ejection fraction , propensity score matching , coronary artery bypass surgery , surgery , artery , heart failure
Background and aim: A debate over alternative therapeutic strategies for multivessel coronary disease is currently ongoing. We aimed at analyzing the results of myocardial revascularization with arterial conduits. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 10,752 patients undergoing isolated coronary bypass surgery within our hospital's group. Average follow‐up was 37.2 months. Through propensity‐matching, we generated three groups (3584 patients each) on the basis of the revascularization strategy: use of one mammary artery plus venous grafts, use of two mammary arteries plus venous graft, and total arterial revascularization. Results: Overall operative mortality was 2.8%. Patient‐related factors (renal failure, advanced age, recent myocardial infarction, depressed LVEF, diabetes) were identified as predictors of mortality (logistic regression). Although mortality was not statistically different among groups, patients receiving more than one arterial conduit displayed in the long‐term better freedom from cardiac death and from adverse cardiac events (repeat revascularization, myocardial infarction, recurrent angina) (Kaplan–Meier analysis). Use of only one arterial conduit, diabetes and depressed LVEF predicted cardiac mortality, and adverse events (Cox regression). No differences in any endpoint emerged among patients receiving two arterial conduit plus venous grafts or total arterial revascularization. Conclusions: These data strongly support the practice of using two arterial conduits rather than one. The operative and late results of coronary surgery with arterial conduits are optimal and should serve as a current benchmark for the comparison with state‐of‐the‐art percutaneous interventions.(J Card Surg 2012;27:427‐433)