Key result
BIMA grafting remains underused in only ~12% of CABGs despite potential survival benefits over LIMA.
Why the study?
Despite the potential survival benefits of bilateral internal mammary artery grafting, its universal adoption is limited by concerns about perioperative complications, patient risk subsets, and technical challenges.
Does bilateral internal mammary artery grafting improve long-term prognosis compared to left internal mammary artery grafting alone in patients undergoing CABG?
Does bilateral internal mammary artery grafting improve long-term prognosis compared to left internal mammary artery grafting alone in patients undergoing CABG?
Bilateral internal mammary artery grafting remains significantly underutilized in clinical practice despite potential survival benefits, primarily due to technical challenges and concerns over perioperative complications.
Supports modified carbo-dissection as equivalent LIMA harvest option; extends surgical technique choices without added time or flow compromise.
The left internal mammary artery (LIMA) graft is considered the "gold standard" of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). This conduit provides increased survival, symptomatic relief, increased freedom from myocardial infarction, and increased freedom from re-intervention when compared to saphenous venous grafting. It has a remarkable long term patency rate with clinical and angiographic outcomes that are unmatched by other conduits. Given the fact that patients often require more than one graft during a coronary revascularization procedure, the prospect of bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) grafting has been very appealing to some surgeons. BIMA grafting has been extensively studied via multiple retrospective and prospective cohort studies and findings have indicated that BIMA grafting can have an increased survival benefit when compared to LIMA grafting alone. As a result, this technique has accrued increasing popularity over the course of the last decade. Yet, questions still remain on whether BIMA grafting is the optimal treatment modality for patients in terms of long-term prognosis. There is limited data at the present time from randomized controlled trials and only 4-12% of CABGs performed today utilize BIMA grafting. Concerns regarding perioperative complications, which patient subsets are at higher risks for complications from the technique, and the technical challenges involved in utilizing and teaching the technique have limited its widespread use.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Umakanthan et al. (2015) conducted a review in Coronary artery disease requiring coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) grafting vs. Left internal mammary artery (LIMA) grafting alone was evaluated. Despite potential survival benefits over LIMA alone, bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) grafting is utilized in only 4-12% of CABGs due to concerns regarding perioperative complications.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: