Mid-Term Clinical Outcome of Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting with Valvulotomized Vein Grafts
Background: The lower patency rate of vein grafts (VG) in comparison to arterial grafts may be related to vein valves, which favor turbulences and thrombosis that lead to graft failure. The aim of this study was to determine the outcome of patients with valvulotomized VG after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) procedure.
Methods: From 2007 to 2014, 233 patients with a mean age of 67 ± 9 years had CABG or combined CABG and valve procedures. Valvulotomized saphenous VG and arterial grafts were used. Clinical follow-up and outcome were evaluated after 6.3 ± 2 years. The graft patency was rated with multislice computed tomography in 57 patients and coronary angiography in 29 patients 3.1 ± 2 years postoperatively.
Results: Overall, 168 patients had segregated CABG surgery, and 65 patients received additional procedures, with mean 2.7 ± 1 arterial and 1.5 ± 0.7 venous anastomoses. The 30-day-mortality in isolated CABG patients was 2%. Survival at five years was 80%. Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) free rate at five years was 80%. At the last follow up (mean 6.3 years), 94% of the patients were in Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) class 0. The quote of patent valvulotomized VG was 96.1% compared to a patency rate of 96.7% for the arterial grafts in the subgroup undergoing angiography or computed tomography of the heart.
Conclusion: Our data demonstrate good mid-term results of graft patency, and comparable clinical results in patients undergoing CABG with valvulotomized VG. A longer follow-up period and a higher number of bypass graft imaging examinations are necessary to affirm our results.
Athanasiou T, Saso S, Rao C, et al. 2011. Radial artery versus saphenous vein conduits for coronary artery bypass surgery: forty years of competition – which conduit offers better patency? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 40:208-20.
Buttar SN, Yan TD, Taggart DP, et al. 2017. Long-term and short-term outcomes of using bilateral internal mammary artery grafting versus left internal mammary artery grafting: a meta-analysis. Heart 103:1419-1426.
Calafiore AM, Contini M, Vitolla G, et al. 2000. Bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting: long-term clinical and angiographic results of in situ versus Y grafts. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 120:990-6.
Calafiore AM, Teodori G, Bosco G, et al. 1996. Intermittent antegrade warm blood cardioplegia in aortic valve replacement. J Card Surg 11:348-354.
Glineur D, D´hoore W, Price J, et al. 2012. Survival benefit of multiple arterial grafting in a 25-year single institutional experience: the importance of the third arterial graft. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 42:284-90
Glineur D, Hanet C, D´hoore W, et al. 2009. Causes of non-functioning right internal mammary used in a Y-graft configuration: insight from a 6-month systematic angiographic trial. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 36:129-136.
Hayward PA, Gordon IR, Hare DL, et al. 2010. Comparable patencies of the radial artery and right internal thoracic artery or saphenous vein beyond 5 years: results from the Radial Artery Patency and Clinical Outcomes trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 139:60-5.
Joannides R, Haefeli W, Linder L, et al. 1995. Nitric oxide is responsible for flow-dependent dilatation of human peripheral conduit arteries in vivo. Circulation 91:1314-9.
Khot UN, Friedman DT, Pettersson G, et al. 2004. Radial artery bypass grafts have an increased occurrence of angiographically severe stenosis and occlusion compared with left internal mammary arteries and saphenous vein grafts. Circulation 109:2086-91.
Lajos TZ, Robicsek F, Thubrikar M, et al. 2007. Improving patency of coronary conduits “valveless” veins and/or arterial grafts. J Card Surg 22:170-7.
Lytle BW, Blackstone EH, Loop FD, et al. 1999. Two internal thoracic artery grafts are better than one. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 117:855-72.
Mills NL. 1989. Saphenous vein graft valves: “The bad guys”. Ann Thorac Surg 48:613-4.
Mohr FW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP, et al. 2013. Coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with three-vessel disease and left main coronary disease: 5-year follow up of the randomized, clinical SYNTAX trial. Lancet 381:629-38.
Molina JE. 1989. Nonreversed saphenous vein grafts for coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg 48:624-7.
Monsefi N, Zierer A, Honarpisheh G, et al. 2016. One-year patency of valvulotomized vein grafts is similar to that of arterial grafts. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 64:204-10.
Mukherjee D, Cheriyan J, Kourliouros A, et al. 2012. Does the right internal thoracic artery or saphenous vein graft offer superior revascularization of the right coronary artery? Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 15:244-7.
Naik MJ, Abu-Omar Y, Alvi A, et al. 2003. Total arterial revascularisation as a primary strategy for coronary artery bypass grafting. Postgrad Med J 79:43-8.
Risteski PS, Akbulut B, Moritz A, et al. 2006. The radial artery as a conduit for coronary artery bypass grafting: review of current knowledge. Anadolu Kardiyol Derg 6:153-62.
Shah PJ, Bui K, Blackmore S, et al. 2005. Has the in situ right internal thoracic artery been overlooked? An angiographic study of the radial artery, internal thoracic arteries and saphenous vein graft patencies in symptomatic patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 27:870-5.
Taggart DP, D`Amico R, Altman DG. 2001. Effect of arterial revascularisation on survival: a systematic review of studies comparing bilateral and single internal mammary arteries. Lancet 358:870-5.
Thubrikar MJ, Robicsek F, Fowler BL, et al. 1994. Pressure trap created by vein valve closure and its role in graft stenosis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 107:707-16.
Wimmer-Greinecker G, Yosseef-Hakimi M, Rinne T, et al. 1999. Effect of internal thoracic artery preparation on blood loss, lung function, and pain. Ann Thorac Surg 6:153-162.
Author Disclosure & Copyright Transfer Agreement
In order to publish the original work of another person(s), The Heart Surgery Forum® must receive an acknowledgment of the Author Agreement and Copyright Transfer Statement transferring to Forum Multimedia Publishing, L.L.C., a subsidiary of Carden Jennings Publishing Co., Ltd. the exclusive rights to print and distribute the author(s) work in all media forms. Failure to check Copyright Transfer agreement box below will delay publication of the manuscript.
A current form follows:
The author(s) hereby transfer(s), assign(s), or otherwise convey(s) all copyright ownership of the manuscript submitted to Forum Multimedia Publishing, LLC (Publisher). The copyright transfer covers the exclusive rights to reproduce and distribute the article and the material contained therein throughout the world in all languages and in all media of expression now known or later developed, including but not limited to reprints, photographic reproduction, microfilm, electronic data processing (including programming, storage, and transmission to other electronic data record(s), or any other reproductions of similar nature), and translations.
However, Publisher grants back to the author(s) the following:
- The right to make and distribute copies of all or part of this work for use of the author(s) in teaching;
- The right to use, after publication in The Heart Surgery Forum, all or part of the material from this work in a book by the author(s), or in a collection of work by the author(s);
- The royalty-free right to make copies of this work for internal distribution within the institution/company that employs the author(s) subject to the provisions below for a work-made-for-hire;
- The right to use figures and tables from this work, and up to 250 words of text, for any purpose;
- The right to make oral presentations of material from this work.
Publisher reserves the right to grant or refuse permission to third parties to republish all or part of the article or translations thereof. To republish, such third parties must obtain written permission from the Publisher. (This is in accordance with the Copyright Statute, United States Code, Title 17. Exception: If all authors were bona fide officers or employees of the U.S. Government at the time the paper was prepared, the work is a “work of the US Government” (prepared by an officer or employee of the US Government as part of official duties), and therefore is not subject to US copyright; such exception should be indicated on signature lines. If this work was prepared under US Government contract or grant, the US Government may reproduce, royalty-free, all or portions of this work and may authorize others to do so, for official US Government purposes only, if the US Government contract or grant so requires.
I have participated in the conception and design of this work and in the writing of the manuscript and take public responsibility for it. Neither this manuscript nor one with substantially similar content under my authorship has been published, has been submitted for publication elsewhere, or will be submitted for publication elsewhere while under consideration by The Heart Surgery Forum, except as described in an attachment. I have reviewed this manuscript (original version) and approve its submission. If I am listed above as corresponding author, I will provide all authors with information regarding this manuscript and will obtain their approval before submitting any revision. I attest to the validity, accuracy, and legitimacy of the content of the manuscript and understand that Publisher assumes no responsibility for the validity, accuracy, and legitimacy of its content. I warrant that this manuscript is original with me and that I have full power to make this Agreement. I warrant that it contains no matter that is libelous or otherwise unlawful or that invades individual privacy or infringes any copyright or other proprietary right. I agree to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless of and from any claim made against Publisher that relates to or arises out of the publication of the manuscript and agree that this indemnification shall include payment of all costs and expenses relating to the defense of any such claim, including all reasonable attorney’s fees.
I warrant that I have no financial interest in the drugs, devices, or procedures described in the manuscript (except as disclosed in the attached statement).
I state that the institutional Human Subjects Committee and/or the Ethics Committee approved the clinical protocol reported in this manuscript for the use of experimental techniques, drugs, or devices in human subjects and appropriate informed consent documents were utilized.
Furthermore, I state that any and all animals used for experimental purposes received humane care in USDA registered facilities in compliance with the “Principles of Laboratory Animal Care” formulated by the National Society for Medical Research and the “Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals” prepared by the Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources and published by the National Institutes of Health (NIH Publication No. 85-23, revised 1985).