A comparison of internal mammary artery and saphenous vein grafts after coronary artery bypass surgery. No difference in 1-year occlusion rates and clinical outcome. CABADAS Research Group of the Interuniversity Cardiology Institute of The Netherlands.
Why the study?
Does internal mammary artery grafting compared to vein grafting improve 1-year occlusion rates and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery?
Population
912 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery who were enrolled in a randomized clinical drug trial
Comparison
Internal mammary artery and vein grafts vs Vein grafts only (n=418)
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
1 year
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
No adjusted difference in occlusion or events with IMA vs vein grafts; leaves open whether conduit superiority reflects selection bias.
Structured PICO
Does internal mammary artery grafting compared to vein grafting improve 1-year occlusion rates and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery?
P
Population
912 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery who were enrolled in a randomized clinical drug trial
I
Intervention
Internal mammary artery (IMA) and vein grafts (n=494)
C
Comparator
Vein grafts only (n=418)
O
Outcome
1-year occlusion rates of distal anastomosessurrogate
The apparent superiority of internal mammary artery grafts over vein grafts at 1 year may be driven by selection bias regarding the grafted coronary arteries rather than the graft material itself, with no significant difference in 1-year clinical outcomes.
Cite This Study
Meer et al. (1994) studied this question.