Key result
Endoscopic vein harvesting reduced pain and leg wound complications with no significant difference in mortality, myocardial infarction, or graft occlusion compared to open harvesting at 2.6 years.
Why the study?
Does endoscopic vein harvesting maintain graft patency and clinical outcomes compared to open harvesting in patients undergoing coronary bypass grafting?
Meta-Analysis (n=267,525)
Does endoscopic vein harvesting maintain graft patency and clinical outcomes compared to open harvesting in patients undergoing coronary bypass grafting?
Endoscopic vein harvesting for CABG provides comparable long-term graft patency and hard clinical outcomes to open harvesting, while significantly reducing leg wound complications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Reduces leg wound complications without compromising outcomes; reinforces endoscopic harvesting as preferred for CABG.
Sastry et al. (2013) conducted a meta-analysis in coronary bypass grafting (n=267,525). Endoscopic vein harvesting vs. Open vein harvesting was evaluated on mortality, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, angina recurrence, vein graft stenosis or occlusion. Endoscopic vein harvesting reduced pain and leg wound complications with no significant difference in mortality, myocardial infarction, or graft occlusion compared to open harvesting at 2.6 years.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: