Contemporary evidence for multiarterial grafting in coronary artery bypass surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Observational data suggests that multiarterial grafting (MAG) is associated with improved long-term outcomes for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), yet adoption remains low due to limited randomized evidence. This review synthesizes contemporary evidence comparing MAG with single arterial grafting (SAG), highlighting recent observational studies and ongoing randomized trials. RECENT FINDINGS: Large registry-based analyses consistently demonstrate a 15-25% relative reduction in long-term mortality and adverse cardiovascular events with MAG compared with SAG. However, randomized evidence is unclear; the Arterial Revascularization Trial (ART) showed no significant survival difference but possessed important methodological limitations. In contrast, randomized data support radial artery use over saphenous vein grafts as a second conduit. The ongoing randomized comparison of the clinical outcome of single vs. multiple arterial grafts (ROMA) trial is expected to provide definitive evidence. SUMMARY: MAG is supported by observational data, but uncertainty persists due to limited randomized evidence and variability in clinical adoption. The results of ROMA will clarify the role of MAG and help determine whether this should become the default strategy for CABG in select patients.