Key result
The no-touch saphenous vein graft harvesting technique significantly increased graft flow velocity (7.3 vs 5.4 cm/s, p<0.01) and 5-year patency (98.4% vs 92.9%, p=0.04) versus conventional harvesting.
Why the study?
It was unclear whether the no-touch harvesting technique for great saphenous vein grafts affects graft flow velocity during coronary artery bypass grafting.
Does the no-touch harvesting technique improve graft flow velocity and patency in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting?
Cohort (n=270)
Does the no-touch harvesting technique improve graft flow velocity and patency in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting?
Absolute Event Rate: 98.4% vs 92.9%
p-value: p=0.04
The no-touch harvesting technique for saphenous vein grafts prevents postoperative diameter expansion and improves both graft flow velocity and 5-year patency compared to conventional harvesting.
No change to clinical practice warranted; leaves open benefit of no-touch harvesting pending randomized confirmation.
Objectives: We aimed to investigate whether the no‐touch (NT) harvesting technique for the great saphenous vein graft (SVG) affects graft flow velocity during coronary artery bypass grafting. Methods: The study included 132 and 138 conduits that underwent NT and conventional (CV) harvesting techniques, respectively (NT and CV groups, respectively). Transit‐time flow measurements and contrast‐enhanced computed tomography (CT) were performed to assess graft flow velocity and patency. Results: Intraoperative graft flows, assessed using a transit‐time flowmeter, were 40 ± 19 and 48 ± 27 mL/min/anastomosis in the NT and CV groups, respectively. Preoperative SVG diameters, assessed via vascular ultrasound, were 2.8 ± 0.7 and 2.8 ± 0.8 mm in the NT and CV groups, respectively. However, postoperative SVG diameters, measured using contrast‐enhanced CT, were 2.7 ± 0.5 and 3.5 ± 0.6 mm in the NT and CV groups, respectively, indicating a significant reduction in the NT group ( p < 0.01). Graft flow velocities, calculated from graft flow and vascular diameter, were 7.3 ± 4.2 and 5.4 ± 3.2 cm/s/anastomosis in the NT and CV groups, respectively, being significantly higher in the NT group ( p < 0.01). The incidence of postoperative occlusion was significantly lower in the NT group (two conduits, 1.5%) than in the CV group (10 conduits, 7.3%) ( p = 0.02). Significant differences were found in the 5‐year patency rates between the two groups (NT group, 98.4%; CV group, 92.9%; p = 0.04). Conclusions: The NT SVG harvesting technique prevents postoperative graft diameter expansion and significantly increases graft flow velocity and patency. Further randomized studies are needed to determine whether differences in blood flow velocity are essential for graft patency over an extended observation period.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kurazumi et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Coronary artery bypass grafting (n=270). No-touch harvesting technique vs. Conventional harvesting technique was evaluated on 5-year patency rate (p=0.04). The no-touch saphenous vein graft harvesting technique significantly increased graft flow velocity (7.3 vs 5.4 cm/s, p<0.01) and 5-year patency (98.4% vs 92.9%, p=0.04) versus conventional harvesting.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: