Literature DB >> 16122451

Do angiographic results from symptom-directed studies reflect true graft patency?

Brian F Buxton1, Manoj Durairaj, David L Hare, Ian Gordon, Simon Moten, Victoria Orford, Siven Seevanayagam.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery graft patency results have been obtained from repeat angiograms in patients who presented with evidence of ischemia. The purpose of this study is to compare protocol-directed angiographic results from a randomized clinical trial with symptom-directed angiography in nontrial patients.
METHODS: Repeat angiography after primary isolated coronary artery bypass grafting was performed in 337 of 2,259 patients between July 1996 and September 2004. Patients were divided into two groups: 596 graft angiograms in 192 trial patients were compared with 389 graft angiograms in 142 nontrial patients. The mean interval from surgery was 1,306 +/- 800 days versus 1,119 +/- 777 days, respectively. Grafting techniques were similar in both groups except that the right internal thoracic artery was used almost exclusively as a free graft in the trial patients. Angiographic outcomes were defined as patent (stenosis <80%) or failure (stenosis > or =80%, occlusion, or the string sign). Comparisons of trial versus nontrial grafts were made using a generalized linear mixed model. Five-year estimates of graft patency were made using survival analyses accounting for interval censoring.
RESULTS: The odds ratio for graft failure for nontrial compared with trial patient grafts was 2.6 (95% confidence interval, 1.6 to 4.3; p < 0.001). Cumulative patency estimates for all grafts at 5 years were trial 91% versus nontrial 83%, p = 0.004. Five-year estimates for individual conduits were left internal thoracic artery, 99% versus 92%, p = 0.002; right internal thoracic artery, 86% versus 87%, p = 0.8; radial artery, 87% versus 86%, p = 0.6; and saphenous vein, 86% versus 56%, p = 0.003.
CONCLUSIONS: Graft patency rates were superior in the trial compared with nontrial patients. Symptom-directed graft failure rates were approximately double those of trial patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16122451     DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2005.03.097

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg        ISSN: 0003-4975            Impact factor:   4.330


  5 in total

1.  Reappraisal of a 20-year experience with the radial artery as a conduit for coronary bypass grafting.

Authors:  Paul Achouh; Khaled Ould Isselmou; Redha Boutekadjirt; Cosimo D'Alessandro; Jean-Yves Pagny; Regis Fouquet; Jean-Noël Fabiani; Christophe Acar
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.191

2.  Saphenous vein graft failure and clinical outcomes: toward a surrogate end point in patients following coronary artery bypass surgery?

Authors:  Ralf E Harskamp; Judson B Williams; Ronald C Hill; Robbert J de Winter; John H Alexander; Renato D Lopes
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2013-03-07       Impact factor: 4.749

3.  The association between coronary graft patency and clinical status in patients with coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Mario Gaudino; Antonino Di Franco; Deepak L Bhatt; John H Alexander; Antonio Abbate; Lorenzo Azzalini; Sigrid Sandner; Garima Sharma; Sunil V Rao; Filippo Crea; Stephen E Fremes; Sripal Bangalore
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2021-04-07       Impact factor: 29.983

4.  Mid-term outcomes for Endoscopic versus Open Vein Harvest: a case control study.

Authors:  Bilal H Kirmani; James B Barnard; Faisal Mourad; Nadene Blakeman; Karen Chetcuti; Joseph Zacharias
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2010-05-28       Impact factor: 1.637

5.  Bilateral Internal Thoracic Artery Configuration for Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Trial.

Authors:  David Glineur; Munir Boodhwani; Claude Hanet; Laurent de Kerchove; Emiliano Navarra; Parla Astarci; Philippe Noirhomme; Gebrine El Khoury
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 6.546

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.