BACKGROUND: We evaluated the perioperative and long-term results of bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting in dialysis patients. METHODS: One hundred one consecutive patients on chronic dialysis who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting were retrospectively compared according to the surgical technique, bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) grafting (n = 76) or single internal thoracic artery (SITA) grafting (n = 25). RESULTS: Hospital mortality was 5.3% in the BITA group and 8.0% in the SITA group (p = not significant). The incidence of mediastinitis was not different (7.9% in the BITA group and 8.0% in the SITA group). The median duration of follow-up was 3.1 years (range, 0.1 to 10.9). Survival and freedom from cardiac mortality were not different between the two groups, but the BITA group had a trend toward better results. Freedom from cardiac events (including cardiac-related death, myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, redo coronary artery bypass grafting, and congestive heart failure) was superior in the BITA group (p = 0.03). Calcification of the ascending aorta, peripheral vascular disease, insulin-dependent diabetes mellitis, and age were the independent risk factors of late death. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative results of BITA grafting in dialysis patients were not different from the results of SITA grafting. However, the long-term results of BITA grafting in dialysis patients were better than the results of SITA grafting. Overall, our results support the continued use of BITA grafting in dialysis patients.
BACKGROUND: We evaluated the perioperative and long-term results of bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting in dialysis patients. METHODS: One hundred one consecutive patients on chronic dialysis who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting were retrospectively compared according to the surgical technique, bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) grafting (n = 76) or single internal thoracic artery (SITA) grafting (n = 25). RESULTS: Hospital mortality was 5.3% in the BITA group and 8.0% in the SITA group (p = not significant). The incidence of mediastinitis was not different (7.9% in the BITA group and 8.0% in the SITA group). The median duration of follow-up was 3.1 years (range, 0.1 to 10.9). Survival and freedom from cardiac mortality were not different between the two groups, but the BITA group had a trend toward better results. Freedom from cardiac events (including cardiac-related death, myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, redo coronary artery bypass grafting, and congestive heart failure) was superior in the BITA group (p = 0.03). Calcification of the ascending aorta, peripheral vascular disease, insulin-dependent diabetes mellitis, and age were the independent risk factors of late death. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative results of BITA grafting in dialysis patients were not different from the results of SITA grafting. However, the long-term results of BITA grafting in dialysis patients were better than the results of SITA grafting. Overall, our results support the continued use of BITA grafting in dialysis patients.