Why the study?
Saphenous vein graft patency is poor compared with arterial grafts in CABG, prompting review of strategies aimed at improving performance such as no-touch harvesting and perivascular adipose tissue preservation.
Do strategies like no-touch harvesting improve saphenous vein graft patency in patients undergoing CABG?
Do strategies like no-touch harvesting improve saphenous vein graft patency in patients undergoing CABG?
Preservation of perivascular adipose tissue through no-touch harvesting techniques may significantly improve the long-term patency of saphenous vein grafts in CABG.
Should not yet change saphenous vein harvesting in CABG; leaves open randomized confirmation of patency benefits.
The gold standard graft for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is the internal thoracic artery (ITA), and the second recommendation is the radial artery. However, complete revascularization with arterial grafts alone is often difficult, and the saphenous vein (SV) is the most commonly used autologous graft for CABG, because it is easier to use without restriction for the length of the graft. On the other hand, the patency of SV grafts (SVGs) is poor compared with that of arterial grafts. The SVG is conventionally harvested as a distended conduit with surrounding tissue removed, a procedure that may cause vascular damage. A no-touch technique of SVG harvesting has been reported to result in improved long-term patency in CABG comparable to that when using the ITA for grafting. Possible reasons for the excellent long-term patency of no-touch SVGs are the physical support provided by preserved surrounding perivascular adipose tissue, preservation of the vascular wall structure including the vasa vasorum, and production of adipocyte-derived factors. In this review, we discuss recent strategies aimed at improving the performance of SVGs, including no-touch harvesting, minimally invasive harvesting and mechanical support using external stents.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mikami et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: