Key result
Endoscopic saphenous vein harvesting resulted in a significantly higher number of preserved endothelial cells (10.35 vs 3.14 cells/mm, p=0.016) just before implantation of the proximal part compared to open harvesting.
Why the study?
Vein graft patency in coronary artery bypass grafting may depend on conventional open versus endoscopic harvesting and endothelial hypoxic damage, prompting evaluation of endothelial loss between harvesting and implantation.
Does endoscopic saphenous vein harvesting reduce endothelial loss compared to open harvesting in patients undergoing CABG?
Comparison
Endoscopic harvesting (vsE, n = 10) vs conventional open harvesting (vsO, n = 16)
Design
Comparative observational study
Authors
Loading...
Endoscopic harvesting may preserve more endothelium at implantation; leaves open effects on graft patency or outcomes.
Observational (n=26)
Does endoscopic saphenous vein harvesting reduce endothelial loss compared to open harvesting in patients undergoing CABG?
Absolute Event Rate: 10.35% vs 3.14%
p-value: p=0.016
Endoscopic harvesting of saphenous veins for CABG results in better preservation of the endothelial layer at the time of proximal implantation compared to open harvesting, though clinical outcomes at 1-2 years were similar.
Milutinović et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Coronary artery disease undergoing CABG (n=26). Endoscopic saphenous vein harvesting vs. Open saphenous vein harvesting was evaluated on Number of CD31 positive endothelial cells/mm just before implantation of the proximal part (p=0.016). Endoscopic saphenous vein harvesting resulted in a significantly higher number of preserved endothelial cells (10.35 vs 3.14 cells/mm, p=0.016) just before implantation of the proximal part compared to open harvesting.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: