Key result
Bilateral internal mammary artery grafting is associated with a 20% mean reduction in relative risk for long-term mortality compared to single internal mammary artery grafting, though its use remains limited by mediastinitis risk.
Why the study?
Use of bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) in CABG has traditionally been limited by risk factors such as mediastinitis.
Does bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) grafting improve long-term outcomes compared to single internal mammary artery (SIMA) grafting in patients undergoing CABG, and can the associated risk of mediastinitis be mitigated?
Does bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) grafting improve long-term outcomes compared to single internal mammary artery (SIMA) grafting in patients undergoing CABG, and can the associated risk of mediastinitis be mitigated?
BIMA in CABG offers superior long-term outcomes compared to SIMA, and the associated risk of mediastinitis can be mitigated through comprehensive perioperative strategies including negative pressure wound therapy.
May support selective BIMA use in low-risk CABG patients; leaves open RCTs to confirm mortality benefit and mediastinitis mitigation.
Bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has traditionally been limited. This review looks at the recent outcome data on BIMA in CABG focusing on the management of risk factors for mediastinitis, one of the potential barriers for more extensive BIMA utilization. A combination of pre-, intra- and postoperative strategies are essential to reduce mediastinitis. Limited data indicate that the incidence of mediastinitis can be reduced using closed incision negative-pressure wound therapy as a part of these strategies with the possibility of offering patients best treatment options by extending BIMA to those with a higher risk of mediastinitis. Recent economic data imply that the technology may challenge the current low uptake of BIMA by reducing the short-term cost differentials between single internal mammary artery and BIMA. Given that most published randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses of observational long-term outcome data favor BIMA, if short-term complications of BIMA including mediastinitis can be controlled adequately, there may be opportunities for more extensive use of BIMA leading to improved long-term outcomes. An ongoing study looking at BIMA in high-risk patients may provide evidence to support the hypothesis that mediastinitis should not be a factor in limiting the use of BIMA in CABG.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bayer et al. (2020) conducted a review in Coronary artery disease requiring CABG. Bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) grafting vs. Single internal mammary artery (SIMA) grafting was evaluated. Bilateral internal mammary artery grafting is associated with a 20% mean reduction in relative risk for long-term mortality compared to single internal mammary artery grafting, though its use remains limited by mediastinitis risk.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: