Alistair G Royse1, Anthony P Brennan2, Jared Ou-Young3, Zulfayandi Pawanis4, David J Canty5, Colin F Royse6. 1. Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia; Department of Surgery, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: alistair.royse@unimelb.edu.au. 2. St. Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 3. Medicalwriters.com, Zurich, Switzerland. 4. Universitas Airlangga Hospital, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia. 5. Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia; Department of Anaesthesia and Pain Management, Monash Medical Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 6. Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia; Department of Anaesthesia and Pain Management, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In 1999, Royse et al. reported on the left internal mammary artery, radial artery, Y-graft technique (LIMA-RA-Y), which achieves total arterial revascularization (TAR). However, the most common coronary reconstruction remains LIMA and supplementary saphenous vein grafts (LIMA + SVG). OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to conduct a survival comparison of LIMA-RA-Y versus the conventional LIMA + SVG. METHODS: Of the original 464 LIMA-RA-Y patients reported (1996 to 1998), 346 were from the Royal Melbourne Hospital. Survival at June 2017 was compared with a group of 534 patients from 1996 to 2003 from the same institution who received LIMA + SVG, or 5,800 patients who received TAR with different grafting configurations. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed with 1:1 matching using 26 variables. Comparisons used Kaplan-Meier (KM) and Cox proportional hazards methods. LIMA-RA-Y was compared with LIMA + SVG in which all non-left anterior descending artery grafts were performed with either composite RA or aorta-coronary SVG with no use of right internal mammary artery. We also conducted a comparison of LIMA-RA-Y versus TAR. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of the LIMA-RA-Y group (n = 346) compared with LIMA + SVG (n = 534) after PSM (n = 232 pairs) did not differ (3.3 ± 0.8 grafts per patient). Survival was worse for LIMA + SVG in the unmatched groups (KM, p < 0.001) and for PSM groups (KM, p = 0.043; Cox proportional hazards ratio: 1.3; 95% confidence interval: 1.0 to 1.6; p = 0.038). Survival did not differ between LIMA-RA-Y and other TAR (n = 5,800) patients before, or after, PSM (n = 332 pairs). CONCLUSIONS: Use of LIMA + SVG has worse survival than LIMA-RA-Y in achieving total arterial revascularization.
BACKGROUND: In 1999, Royse et al. reported on the left internal mammary artery, radial artery, Y-graft technique (LIMA-RA-Y), which achieves total arterial revascularization (TAR). However, the most common coronary reconstruction remains LIMA and supplementary saphenous vein grafts (LIMA + SVG). OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to conduct a survival comparison of LIMA-RA-Y versus the conventional LIMA + SVG. METHODS: Of the original 464 LIMA-RA-Y patients reported (1996 to 1998), 346 were from the Royal Melbourne Hospital. Survival at June 2017 was compared with a group of 534 patients from 1996 to 2003 from the same institution who received LIMA + SVG, or 5,800 patients who received TAR with different grafting configurations. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed with 1:1 matching using 26 variables. Comparisons used Kaplan-Meier (KM) and Cox proportional hazards methods. LIMA-RA-Y was compared with LIMA + SVG in which all non-left anterior descending artery grafts were performed with either composite RA or aorta-coronary SVG with no use of right internal mammary artery. We also conducted a comparison of LIMA-RA-Y versus TAR. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of the LIMA-RA-Y group (n = 346) compared with LIMA + SVG (n = 534) after PSM (n = 232 pairs) did not differ (3.3 ± 0.8 grafts per patient). Survival was worse for LIMA + SVG in the unmatched groups (KM, p < 0.001) and for PSM groups (KM, p = 0.043; Cox proportional hazards ratio: 1.3; 95% confidence interval: 1.0 to 1.6; p = 0.038). Survival did not differ between LIMA-RA-Y and other TAR (n = 5,800) patients before, or after, PSM (n = 332 pairs). CONCLUSIONS: Use of LIMA + SVG has worse survival than LIMA-RA-Y in achieving total arterial revascularization.
Authors: Adam S Evans; Menachem M Weiner; Shahzad Shaefi; Prakash A Patel; Matthew M Townsley; Abirami Kumaresan; Jared W Feinman; Ashley V Fritz; Archer K Martin; Toby B Steinberg; J Ross Renew; Jane L Gui; Brian Radvansky; Himani Bhatt; Sudhakar Subramani; Archit Sharma; Jacob T Gutsche; John G Augoustides; Harish Ramakrishna Journal: J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth Date: 2019-11-09 Impact factor: 2.628
Authors: Sérgio C Rayol; Jef Van den Eynde; Luiz Rafael P Cavalcanti; Antonio Carlos Escorel; Arian Arjomandi Rad; Andrea Amabile; Wilson Botelho; Arjang Ruhparwar; Konstantin Zhigalov; Alexander Weymann; Dario Celestino Sobral; Michel Pompeu B O Sá Journal: Braz J Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2021-02-01