Right internal mammary artery versus radial artery as second arterial conduit in coronary artery bypass grafting: A case-control study of 1526 patients
Abstract Objective : Additional arterial grafts such as the right internal mammary artery (RIMA) or the radial artery (RA) have been proposed to improve long term outcomes in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). RA is largely preferred over RIMA as it is less technically demanding and there is a...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of surgery (London, England) England), 2015-04, Vol.16 (Pt B), p.183-189 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 189 |
---|---|
container_issue | Pt B |
container_start_page | 183 |
container_title | International journal of surgery (London, England) |
container_volume | 16 |
creator | Raja, Shahzad G Benedetto, Umberto Jothidasan, Anand Jujjavarapu, Raju Krishnam Ukwu, Uchenna Franklin De Robertis, Fabio Bahrami, Toufan Gaer, Jullien A Amrani, Mohamed |
description | Abstract Objective : Additional arterial grafts such as the right internal mammary artery (RIMA) or the radial artery (RA) have been proposed to improve long term outcomes in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). RA is largely preferred over RIMA as it is less technically demanding and there is a perception that bilateral IMA usage increases the risk of sternal wound complications. However, there is a paucity of direct comparison of the two conduits to guide surgeons to choose the best second arterial conduit for CABG. Methods : A propensity score adjusted analysis of patients undergoing multiple arterial grafting with RIMA ( n = 747) and RA ( n = 779) during the study period (2001–2013) was conducted to investigate the impact of the two strategies on early and late outcomes. Results : RIMA did not increase the incidence of postoperative complications including deep sternal wound infection ( P = 0.8). Compared to the RIMA, the RA was associated with an increased risk for late mortality (Hazard Ratio [HR] 1.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2–3.1; P = 0.008) and repeat revascularization (HR 1.5; 95% CI 1.0–2.2; P = 0.044). A trend towards an extra risk for late mortality from RA over RIMA was observed among diabetic (HR 3.3; 95% CI 1.1–9.7) and obese patients (HR 2.1; 95% CI 0.8–5.46). Conclusions : RIMA as a second conduit did not increase the operative risk including sternal wound complications and improved long term outcomes including overall survival when compared to RA. This advantage was stronger among diabetic and obese patients. These findings strongly support RIMA as the first choice second arterial conduit in CABG. Further randomized studies with angiographic control and long-term follow-up are needed to address this issue. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.08.342 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1674693324</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1743919114008267</els_id><sourcerecordid>1674693324</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c521t-b03b1fef7bc2e18a74ddcc54d6b31fb42cb9b4325e1cc745fb01b696aff6689e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9Ul2L1TAQLaK46-of8EHy6Etrvpq2IsKy7KqwIPjxHJJ0ek3tba-ZdKG_xL-7Cfe6iA8-ZXLmnAMzZ4riJaMVo0y9GSs_4lpxymRF20pI_qg4Z40UZcfq7vFD3bGz4hniSKmkLWufFme8ZrXoRHte_P7idz8i8XOEMJuJ7M1-b8JGTEjARu4g4IokmN6n5gk0SBDcMvdHIHfyb_XZJ5Vhmf-ysNvBIJJdMEP08-4tuSTOIJRJEsMyEYxrv5FlIKzmihxM9DBHfF48GcyE8OL0XhTfb66_XX0sbz9_-HR1eVu6mrNYWiosG2BorOPAWtPIvneulr2ygg1Wcmc7KwWvgTnXyHqwlFnVKTMMSrUdiIvi9dH3EJZfK2DUe48OpsnMsKyomWqk6oTgMlH5kerCghhg0Ifg87I0ozoHokedA9E5EE1bnQJJolcn_9XuoX-Q_EkgEd4dCZCmvPMQNLq0AQe9D-Ci7hf_f__3_8jd5GfvzPQTNsBxWXOsaQ6NXFP9NZ9EvggmKW25asQ9Y6C1LA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1674693324</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Right internal mammary artery versus radial artery as second arterial conduit in coronary artery bypass grafting: A case-control study of 1526 patients</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><source>EZB Electronic Journals Library</source><creator>Raja, Shahzad G ; Benedetto, Umberto ; Jothidasan, Anand ; Jujjavarapu, Raju Krishnam ; Ukwu, Uchenna Franklin ; De Robertis, Fabio ; Bahrami, Toufan ; Gaer, Jullien A ; Amrani, Mohamed</creator><creatorcontrib>Raja, Shahzad G ; Benedetto, Umberto ; Jothidasan, Anand ; Jujjavarapu, Raju Krishnam ; Ukwu, Uchenna Franklin ; De Robertis, Fabio ; Bahrami, Toufan ; Gaer, Jullien A ; Amrani, Mohamed ; Harefield Cardiac Outcomes Research Group</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Objective : Additional arterial grafts such as the right internal mammary artery (RIMA) or the radial artery (RA) have been proposed to improve long term outcomes in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). RA is largely preferred over RIMA as it is less technically demanding and there is a perception that bilateral IMA usage increases the risk of sternal wound complications. However, there is a paucity of direct comparison of the two conduits to guide surgeons to choose the best second arterial conduit for CABG. Methods : A propensity score adjusted analysis of patients undergoing multiple arterial grafting with RIMA ( n = 747) and RA ( n = 779) during the study period (2001–2013) was conducted to investigate the impact of the two strategies on early and late outcomes. Results : RIMA did not increase the incidence of postoperative complications including deep sternal wound infection ( P = 0.8). Compared to the RIMA, the RA was associated with an increased risk for late mortality (Hazard Ratio [HR] 1.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2–3.1; P = 0.008) and repeat revascularization (HR 1.5; 95% CI 1.0–2.2; P = 0.044). A trend towards an extra risk for late mortality from RA over RIMA was observed among diabetic (HR 3.3; 95% CI 1.1–9.7) and obese patients (HR 2.1; 95% CI 0.8–5.46). Conclusions : RIMA as a second conduit did not increase the operative risk including sternal wound complications and improved long term outcomes including overall survival when compared to RA. This advantage was stronger among diabetic and obese patients. These findings strongly support RIMA as the first choice second arterial conduit in CABG. Further randomized studies with angiographic control and long-term follow-up are needed to address this issue.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1743-9191</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1743-9159</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.08.342</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25153938</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Case-Control Studies ; Coronary Artery Bypass - methods ; Coronary Artery Bypass - mortality ; Coronary artery bypass grafting ; Coronary Artery Disease - surgery ; Diabetes Complications ; Female ; Humans ; Internal mammary artery ; Internal Mammary-Coronary Artery Anastomosis - methods ; Internal Mammary-Coronary Artery Anastomosis - mortality ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Multiple arterial grafting ; Obesity - complications ; Postoperative Complications ; Propensity Score ; Propensity score analysis ; Radial artery ; Radial Artery - transplantation ; Reoperation ; Retrospective Studies ; Surgery</subject><ispartof>International journal of surgery (London, England), 2015-04, Vol.16 (Pt B), p.183-189</ispartof><rights>IJS Publishing Group Limited</rights><rights>2014 IJS Publishing Group Limited</rights><rights>Copyright © 2014 IJS Publishing Group Limited. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c521t-b03b1fef7bc2e18a74ddcc54d6b31fb42cb9b4325e1cc745fb01b696aff6689e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c521t-b03b1fef7bc2e18a74ddcc54d6b31fb42cb9b4325e1cc745fb01b696aff6689e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1743919114008267$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25153938$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Raja, Shahzad G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Benedetto, Umberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jothidasan, Anand</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jujjavarapu, Raju Krishnam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ukwu, Uchenna Franklin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Robertis, Fabio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bahrami, Toufan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gaer, Jullien A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amrani, Mohamed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harefield Cardiac Outcomes Research Group</creatorcontrib><title>Right internal mammary artery versus radial artery as second arterial conduit in coronary artery bypass grafting: A case-control study of 1526 patients</title><title>International journal of surgery (London, England)</title><addtitle>Int J Surg</addtitle><description>Abstract Objective : Additional arterial grafts such as the right internal mammary artery (RIMA) or the radial artery (RA) have been proposed to improve long term outcomes in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). RA is largely preferred over RIMA as it is less technically demanding and there is a perception that bilateral IMA usage increases the risk of sternal wound complications. However, there is a paucity of direct comparison of the two conduits to guide surgeons to choose the best second arterial conduit for CABG. Methods : A propensity score adjusted analysis of patients undergoing multiple arterial grafting with RIMA ( n = 747) and RA ( n = 779) during the study period (2001–2013) was conducted to investigate the impact of the two strategies on early and late outcomes. Results : RIMA did not increase the incidence of postoperative complications including deep sternal wound infection ( P = 0.8). Compared to the RIMA, the RA was associated with an increased risk for late mortality (Hazard Ratio [HR] 1.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2–3.1; P = 0.008) and repeat revascularization (HR 1.5; 95% CI 1.0–2.2; P = 0.044). A trend towards an extra risk for late mortality from RA over RIMA was observed among diabetic (HR 3.3; 95% CI 1.1–9.7) and obese patients (HR 2.1; 95% CI 0.8–5.46). Conclusions : RIMA as a second conduit did not increase the operative risk including sternal wound complications and improved long term outcomes including overall survival when compared to RA. This advantage was stronger among diabetic and obese patients. These findings strongly support RIMA as the first choice second arterial conduit in CABG. Further randomized studies with angiographic control and long-term follow-up are needed to address this issue.</description><subject>Case-Control Studies</subject><subject>Coronary Artery Bypass - methods</subject><subject>Coronary Artery Bypass - mortality</subject><subject>Coronary artery bypass grafting</subject><subject>Coronary Artery Disease - surgery</subject><subject>Diabetes Complications</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Internal mammary artery</subject><subject>Internal Mammary-Coronary Artery Anastomosis - methods</subject><subject>Internal Mammary-Coronary Artery Anastomosis - mortality</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Multiple arterial grafting</subject><subject>Obesity - complications</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications</subject><subject>Propensity Score</subject><subject>Propensity score analysis</subject><subject>Radial artery</subject><subject>Radial Artery - transplantation</subject><subject>Reoperation</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><issn>1743-9191</issn><issn>1743-9159</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9Ul2L1TAQLaK46-of8EHy6Etrvpq2IsKy7KqwIPjxHJJ0ek3tba-ZdKG_xL-7Cfe6iA8-ZXLmnAMzZ4riJaMVo0y9GSs_4lpxymRF20pI_qg4Z40UZcfq7vFD3bGz4hniSKmkLWufFme8ZrXoRHte_P7idz8i8XOEMJuJ7M1-b8JGTEjARu4g4IokmN6n5gk0SBDcMvdHIHfyb_XZJ5Vhmf-ysNvBIJJdMEP08-4tuSTOIJRJEsMyEYxrv5FlIKzmihxM9DBHfF48GcyE8OL0XhTfb66_XX0sbz9_-HR1eVu6mrNYWiosG2BorOPAWtPIvneulr2ygg1Wcmc7KwWvgTnXyHqwlFnVKTMMSrUdiIvi9dH3EJZfK2DUe48OpsnMsKyomWqk6oTgMlH5kerCghhg0Ifg87I0ozoHokedA9E5EE1bnQJJolcn_9XuoX-Q_EkgEd4dCZCmvPMQNLq0AQe9D-Ci7hf_f__3_8jd5GfvzPQTNsBxWXOsaQ6NXFP9NZ9EvggmKW25asQ9Y6C1LA</recordid><startdate>20150401</startdate><enddate>20150401</enddate><creator>Raja, Shahzad G</creator><creator>Benedetto, Umberto</creator><creator>Jothidasan, Anand</creator><creator>Jujjavarapu, Raju Krishnam</creator><creator>Ukwu, Uchenna Franklin</creator><creator>De Robertis, Fabio</creator><creator>Bahrami, Toufan</creator><creator>Gaer, Jullien A</creator><creator>Amrani, Mohamed</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150401</creationdate><title>Right internal mammary artery versus radial artery as second arterial conduit in coronary artery bypass grafting: A case-control study of 1526 patients</title><author>Raja, Shahzad G ; Benedetto, Umberto ; Jothidasan, Anand ; Jujjavarapu, Raju Krishnam ; Ukwu, Uchenna Franklin ; De Robertis, Fabio ; Bahrami, Toufan ; Gaer, Jullien A ; Amrani, Mohamed</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c521t-b03b1fef7bc2e18a74ddcc54d6b31fb42cb9b4325e1cc745fb01b696aff6689e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Case-Control Studies</topic><topic>Coronary Artery Bypass - methods</topic><topic>Coronary Artery Bypass - mortality</topic><topic>Coronary artery bypass grafting</topic><topic>Coronary Artery Disease - surgery</topic><topic>Diabetes Complications</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Internal mammary artery</topic><topic>Internal Mammary-Coronary Artery Anastomosis - methods</topic><topic>Internal Mammary-Coronary Artery Anastomosis - mortality</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Multiple arterial grafting</topic><topic>Obesity - complications</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications</topic><topic>Propensity Score</topic><topic>Propensity score analysis</topic><topic>Radial artery</topic><topic>Radial Artery - transplantation</topic><topic>Reoperation</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Raja, Shahzad G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Benedetto, Umberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jothidasan, Anand</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jujjavarapu, Raju Krishnam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ukwu, Uchenna Franklin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Robertis, Fabio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bahrami, Toufan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gaer, Jullien A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amrani, Mohamed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harefield Cardiac Outcomes Research Group</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>International journal of surgery (London, England)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Raja, Shahzad G</au><au>Benedetto, Umberto</au><au>Jothidasan, Anand</au><au>Jujjavarapu, Raju Krishnam</au><au>Ukwu, Uchenna Franklin</au><au>De Robertis, Fabio</au><au>Bahrami, Toufan</au><au>Gaer, Jullien A</au><au>Amrani, Mohamed</au><aucorp>Harefield Cardiac Outcomes Research Group</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Right internal mammary artery versus radial artery as second arterial conduit in coronary artery bypass grafting: A case-control study of 1526 patients</atitle><jtitle>International journal of surgery (London, England)</jtitle><addtitle>Int J Surg</addtitle><date>2015-04-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>Pt B</issue><spage>183</spage><epage>189</epage><pages>183-189</pages><issn>1743-9191</issn><eissn>1743-9159</eissn><abstract>Abstract Objective : Additional arterial grafts such as the right internal mammary artery (RIMA) or the radial artery (RA) have been proposed to improve long term outcomes in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). RA is largely preferred over RIMA as it is less technically demanding and there is a perception that bilateral IMA usage increases the risk of sternal wound complications. However, there is a paucity of direct comparison of the two conduits to guide surgeons to choose the best second arterial conduit for CABG. Methods : A propensity score adjusted analysis of patients undergoing multiple arterial grafting with RIMA ( n = 747) and RA ( n = 779) during the study period (2001–2013) was conducted to investigate the impact of the two strategies on early and late outcomes. Results : RIMA did not increase the incidence of postoperative complications including deep sternal wound infection ( P = 0.8). Compared to the RIMA, the RA was associated with an increased risk for late mortality (Hazard Ratio [HR] 1.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2–3.1; P = 0.008) and repeat revascularization (HR 1.5; 95% CI 1.0–2.2; P = 0.044). A trend towards an extra risk for late mortality from RA over RIMA was observed among diabetic (HR 3.3; 95% CI 1.1–9.7) and obese patients (HR 2.1; 95% CI 0.8–5.46). Conclusions : RIMA as a second conduit did not increase the operative risk including sternal wound complications and improved long term outcomes including overall survival when compared to RA. This advantage was stronger among diabetic and obese patients. These findings strongly support RIMA as the first choice second arterial conduit in CABG. Further randomized studies with angiographic control and long-term follow-up are needed to address this issue.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>25153938</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.08.342</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1743-9191 |
ispartof | International journal of surgery (London, England), 2015-04, Vol.16 (Pt B), p.183-189 |
issn | 1743-9191 1743-9159 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1674693324 |
source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals; EZB Electronic Journals Library |
subjects | Case-Control Studies Coronary Artery Bypass - methods Coronary Artery Bypass - mortality Coronary artery bypass grafting Coronary Artery Disease - surgery Diabetes Complications Female Humans Internal mammary artery Internal Mammary-Coronary Artery Anastomosis - methods Internal Mammary-Coronary Artery Anastomosis - mortality Male Middle Aged Multiple arterial grafting Obesity - complications Postoperative Complications Propensity Score Propensity score analysis Radial artery Radial Artery - transplantation Reoperation Retrospective Studies Surgery |
title | Right internal mammary artery versus radial artery as second arterial conduit in coronary artery bypass grafting: A case-control study of 1526 patients |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T17%3A25%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Right%20internal%20mammary%20artery%20versus%20radial%20artery%20as%20second%20arterial%20conduit%20in%20coronary%20artery%20bypass%20grafting:%20A%20case-control%20study%20of%201526%20patients&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20surgery%20(London,%20England)&rft.au=Raja,%20Shahzad%20G&rft.aucorp=Harefield%20Cardiac%20Outcomes%20Research%20Group&rft.date=2015-04-01&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=Pt%20B&rft.spage=183&rft.epage=189&rft.pages=183-189&rft.issn=1743-9191&rft.eissn=1743-9159&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.08.342&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1674693324%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1674693324&rft_id=info:pmid/25153938&rft_els_id=S1743919114008267&rfr_iscdi=true |