Why the study?
Saphenous vein graft patency is lower than arterial grafts, and whether the CHA2DS2-VASc score associates with saphenous vein graft disease after CABG was unknown.
Does the CHA2DS2-VASc score predict saphenous vein graft disease in patients with prior CABG surgery?
Does the CHA2DS2-VASc score predict saphenous vein graft disease in patients with prior CABG surgery?
The CHA2DS2-VASc score is a strong independent predictor of saphenous vein graft disease in patients with prior CABG, providing a simple tool for risk assessment.
May aid post-CABG SVGD risk stratification; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) are still frequently used in coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). However, the patency rate of SVGs is lower than arterial grafts. CHA2DS2-VASc score gives important information about the prognosis of various cardiovascular diseases. In this study, we aimed to investigate the association between CHA2DS2-VASc score and saphenous vein graft disease (SVGD) in patients with history of CABG surgery. METHODS: A total of 241 patients who had undergone CABG surgery and who underwent coronary angiography due to stable angina pectoris symptoms were reviewed retrospectively. SVGD was defined as ≥50% stenosis in at least one SVG. Patients were divided into two groups according to the presence or absence of SVGD. RESULTS: It was found that CHA2DS2-VASc scores were significantly higher in SVGD group. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, time interval after CABG [odds ratio (OR) = 1.077, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.004-1.155; P = 0.037], and CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 4 (OR = 10.10, 95% CI 4.739-21.276; P < 0.001) were found to be independent predictors of SVGD. CONCLUSION: For the first time, our results have suggested that CHA2DS2-VASc score, which is commonly used in daily clinical practice and easy to calculate, can provide useful information for the risk assessment of patients with SVGs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yarlıoğlueş et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: