Why the study?
The study was conducted to evaluate in-hospital outcomes of bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting, considered an effective yet controversial surgical technique for myocardial revascularization.
Does bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting improve in-hospital outcomes compared to single internal thoracic artery grafting in patients undergoing CABG?
Does bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting improve in-hospital outcomes compared to single internal thoracic artery grafting in patients undergoing CABG?
Bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting is as safe as single ITA grafting regarding major in-hospital complications, though it requires longer hospitalization and more inotropic support.
BITA in-hospital data add institutional experience; leaves open long-term survival questions versus single ITA.
Highlights The present study was conducted to evaluate in-hospital outcomes of one of the most effective and simultaneously controversial surgical techniques for myocardial revascularization using two internal thoracic arteries (ITA). To this date, this is the most complete analysis that has been carried out at the Research Institute on the topic of studying bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting (BITA). The results obtained are of great importance for the subsequent evaluation of long-term results. Abstract Aim. To analyze in-hospital outcomes of BITA. Methods. The study included 232 patients who were admitted to the Cardiac Surgery Department for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). All patients were divided into 2 groups depending on the use of either single or bilateral ITA conduits. Both groups included equal number of patients – 116. In-hospital outcomes were analyzed. Results. BITA and CABG with single ITA were proven to be comparable regarding myocardial infarction, stroke, the need for percutaneous coronary intervention, death, and composite endpoint. At the same time BITA patients significantly more often had longer hospital stay and required inotropic drugs. Conclusion. BITA is a safe procedure comparable to classic CABG in terms of in-hospital complications, but at the same time, this intervention is associated with longer hospital stay, and extended inotropic drugs use.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Фролов et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: