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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of surgery (London, England) England), 2015-04, Vol.16 (Pt B), p.183-189
Hauptverfasser: Raja, Shahzad G, Benedetto, Umberto, Jothidasan, Anand, Jujjavarapu, Raju Krishnam, Ukwu, Uchenna Franklin, De Robertis, Fabio, Bahrami, Toufan, Gaer, Jullien A, Amrani, Mohamed
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