4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Angiographic Patency of Coronary Artery Bypass Conduits: A Network Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Trials

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Several randomized trials have compared the patency of coronary artery bypass conduits. All of the published studies, however, have performed pairwise comparisons and a comprehensive evaluation of the patency rates of all conduits has yet to be published. We set out to investigate the angiographic patency rates of all conduits used in coronary bypass surgery by performing a network meta‐analysis of the current available randomized evidence.

          Methods and Results

          A systematic literature search was conducted for randomized controlled trials comparing the angiographic patency rate of the conventionally harvested saphenous vein, the no‐touch saphenous vein, the radial artery (RA), the right internal thoracic artery, or the gastroepiploic artery. The primary outcome was graft occlusion. A total of 4160 studies were retrieved of which 14 were included with 3651 grafts analyzed. The weighted mean angiographic follow‐up was 5.1 years. Compared with the conventionally harvested saphenous vein, both the RA (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 0.54; 95% CI, 0.35–0.82) and the no‐touch saphenous vein (IRR 0.55; 95% CI, 0.39–0.78) were associated with lower graft occlusion. The RA ranked as the best conduit (rank score for RA 0.87 versus 0.85 for no‐touch saphenous vein, 0.23 for right internal thoracic artery, 0.29 for gastroepiploic artery, and 0.25 for the conventionally harvested saphenous vein).

          Conclusions

          Compared with the conventionally harvested saphenous vein, only the RA and no‐touch saphenous vein grafts are associated with significantly lower graft occlusion rates. The RA ranks as the best conduit.

          Registration

          URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero; Unique identifier: CRD42020164492.

          Related collections

          Most cited references33

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Radial-Artery or Saphenous-Vein Grafts in Coronary-Artery Bypass Surgery

            The use of radial-artery grafts for coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) may result in better postoperative outcomes than the use of saphenous-vein grafts. However, randomized, controlled trials comparing radial-artery grafts and saphenous-vein grafts have been individually underpowered to detect differences in clinical outcomes. We performed a patient-level combined analysis of randomized, controlled trials to compare radial-artery grafts and saphenous-vein grafts for CABG.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Bilateral versus Single Internal-Thoracic-Artery Grafts at 10 Years

              Multiple arterial grafts may result in longer survival than single arterial grafts after coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery. We evaluated the use of bilateral internal-thoracic-artery grafts for CABG.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                mfg9004@med.cornell.edu
                Journal
                J Am Heart Assoc
                J Am Heart Assoc
                10.1002/(ISSN)2047-9980
                JAH3
                ahaoa
                Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                2047-9980
                09 March 2021
                16 March 2021
                : 10
                : 6 ( doiID: 10.1002/jah3.v10.6 )
                : e019206
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery Weill Cornell Medicine New York NY
                [ 2 ] Samuel J. Wood Library and C.V. Starr Biomedical Information Centre, Weill Cornell Medicine New York NY
                [ 3 ] Schulich Heart Centre Sunnybrook Health Science University of Toronto Toronto Ontario Canada
                [ 4 ] Department of Cardiology Austin Health Melbourne Australia
                [ 5 ] Department of Medico‐Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies Sapienza University Rome Italy
                [ 6 ] Mediterranea Cardiocentro Naples Italy
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence to: Mario Gaudino, MD, Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Weill Cornell Medicine, 525 E 68th St, New York, NY 10065. E‐mail: mfg9004@ 123456med.cornell.edu

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4680-0815
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4954-4685
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8678-2060
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9554-6556
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6103-8510
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1723-3049
                Article
                JAH36044
                10.1161/JAHA.120.019206
                8174193
                33686866
                552725a8-57e4-4eca-bfaa-086907679bb6
                © 2021 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

                History
                : 03 September 2020
                : 29 January 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 3, Pages: 71, Words: 5578
                Funding
                Funded by: Bernard S Goldman Chair in Cardiovascular Surgery
                Funded by: Canadian Institutes of Health Research , open-funder-registry 10.13039/501100000024;
                Categories
                Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis
                Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                March 16, 2021
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:6.0.1 mode:remove_FC converted:09.04.2021

                Cardiovascular Medicine
                coronary artery bypass,coronary artery bypass graft,coronary artery disease,cardiovascular surgery,clinical studies,meta analysis,quality and outcomes,revascularization

                Comments

                Comment on this article