Off-Pump Coronary Revascularization of the Circumflex System: Comparison between Sequential and Nonsequential Arterial Grafts


  • Oren Lev-Ran
  • Rony Braunstein
  • Natalie Hansson
  • Dmitry Pevni
  • Ram Sharony
  • Gil Bolotin
  • Gideon Uretzky



Background: Sequential grafting increases the availability of arterial grafts. This study aims to determine the safety and efficacy of sequential grafting of the circumflex coronary distribution performed off-pump.

Methods: Between 2000 and 2003, 136 patients undergoing off-pump sequential arterial grafting of the circumflex territory were compared to 278 patients who received nonsequential grafts to the same area.

Results: The grafts/patient ratio was higher in the sequential than the nonsequential group (3.2 ± .4 and 2.3 ± .2, respectively, P < .0001). Radial artery conduits and T-grafts were used more often in the sequential group; conversely, bilateral internal thoracic artery configurations were more frequent in the nonsequential groups (P < .0001). There were 1.2 sequential anastomoses per patient. Early mortality (2.2% versus 2.5%), myocardial infarction (2.2% versus 1.1%) and stroke (.7% versus none) rates were comparable. Use of sequentials or other operative confounders had no independent effect on the occurrence of early adverse events (stepwise logistic regression). At 3.5 years, survival was 95.9% and 84.2% in the sequential and nonsequential groups, respectively (P = .231, log-rank). Despite comparable incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (6.6% versus 8.6%, P = .470) and similar 3.5-year freedom from MACE (88.7% for both groups, P = .682), Cox regression analysis identified sequential grafting as an independent predictor of MACE (P < .0001, HR 19.9), increasing this risk by 20-fold.

Conclusions: Off-pump sequential grafting of the circumflex system may be safely performed. The use of sequen-tials, however, had an independent effect on increased midterm MACE. The distribution of events suggests culpability of surgical factors and may reflect a learning curve.


Arom KV, Flavin T, Emery RW, et al. 2000. Safety and efficacy of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac 69:704-10.nBuxton BF, Komeda M, Fuller JA, et al. 1998. Bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting may improve outcome of coronary artery surgery. Circulation 98:11-6.nCalafiore AM, Di Mauro M, Teodori G, et al. 2002. Impact of aortic manipulation on incidence of cerebrovascular accidents after surgical myocardial revascularization. Ann Thorac Surg 73:1387-93.nDion R, Glineur D, Derouck D, et al. 2000. Long-term clinical and angiographic follow-up of sequential internal thoracic artery grafting. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 17:407-14.nFerguson TB Jr, Hammil BG, Peterson ED, et al. 2002. STS National Database Committee. A decade of risk-change profiles and outcomes for isolated coronary artery bypass grafting procedures, 1990-1999: a report from the STS National Database Committee and Duke Clinical Research Institute. Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Ann Thorac Surg 73:480-9.nGaudino M, Alessandrini F, Pragliola C, et al. 2004. Composite Y internal thoracic artery-saphenous vein grafts: short-term angiographic results and vasoreactive profile. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 127:1139-44.nKhot 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.nLev-Ran O, Loberman D, Matsa M, et al. 2004. Reduced strokes in the elderly: the benefits of untouched aorta off-pump coronary surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 77:102-7.nLev-Ran O, Paz Y, Pevni D, et al. 2002. Bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting: midterm results of composite versus in-situ crossover graft. Ann Thorac Surg 74:704-11.nMack M, Pfister A, Bachand D, et al. 2004. Comparison of coronary artery bypass in patients with multivessel disease. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 127:167-73.nManiar HS, Sundt TM, Barner HB, et al. 2002. Effect of target stenosis and location on radial artery graft patency. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 123:45-52.nMatsuura K, Kobayashi J, Tagusari O, et al. 2004. Rationale for off-pump coronary revascularization to small branches - angiographic study of 1,283 anastomoses in 408 patients. Ann Thorac Surg 77:1530-4.nNilsson J, Algotsson L, Hoglund P, et al. 2004. Early mortality in coronary bypass surgery: the Euroscore versus The Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk algorithm. Ann Thorac Surg 77:1235-9.nRorich MB, Furlan AJ. 1990. Risk at cardiac surgery in patients with prior stroke. Neurology 40:835-7.nSchmidt SE, Jones JW, Thornby JI, et al. 1997. Improved survival with multiple left-sided bilateral internal thoracic artery grafts. Ann Thorac Surg 64:9-15.nStamou SC, Hill PC, Dangas G, et al. 2001. Stroke after coronary artery bypass: incidence, predictors and clinical outcome. Stroke 32:1508-13.nSuma H, Isomura T, Horii T, Sato T. 2000. Late angiographic result of using the right gastroepiploic artery as a graft. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 120:496-8.nTaggart DP, D'Amico R, Altman DG. 2001. Effect of arterial revascular-ization on survival: a systematic review of studies comparing bilateral and single internal mammary arteries. Lancet 358:870-5.nWareing TH, Davila-Roman VG, Barzilai B, et al. 1992. Management of severely atherosclerotic ascending aorta during cardiac operations. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 103:453-62.n



How to Cite

Lev-Ran, O., Braunstein, R., Hansson, N., Pevni, D., Sharony, R., Bolotin, G., & Uretzky, G. (2005). Off-Pump Coronary Revascularization of the Circumflex System: Comparison between Sequential and Nonsequential Arterial Grafts. The Heart Surgery Forum, 8(4), E201-E206.




Most read articles by the same author(s)