The Valley Columbia Heart Center, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, Ridgewood, New Jersey 07450, USA.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2012 Apr;41(4):770-5; discussion 776. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezr213. Epub 2012 Jan 20.
Bilateral internal mammary arteries (BIMA) remains widely underutilized in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Although prior research has demonstrated a long-term benefit of the use of BIMA over left internal mammary artery (LIMA)-only, validation of these results is lacking in a contemporary surgical experience. We compared complications and survival at 17-year follow-up in a large series of consecutive CABG patients from a single institution that underwent BIMA grafting with a propensity-matched group where LIMA only was used.
Propensity scores representing the estimated probabilities of patients receiving either BIMA or LIMA alone were developed based on 22 observed baseline covariates in a logistic regression model with procedure group as the dependent variable. The nearest-neighbour-matching algorithm with Greedy 5-1 Digit Matching was used to produce two patient cohorts of 928 patients each balanced for baseline factors. We compared 30-day morbidity and mortality, as well as long-term survival at 5-year intervals up to 17-year follow-up.
In-hospital and 30-day mortality was 0.8% for the BIMA group and 1.1% for the LIMA-saphenous vein grafting (SVG). No significant difference was found in complications, mortality and/or length-of-stay between these two groups. Off-pump was done in 48.9% of BIMA cases and 51.3% of LIMA cases. Regardless of the types of grafts used, on-pump patients were more likely to have postoperative permanent strokes and longer postoperative lengths of stay. Use of the BIMA over LIMA-only had a statistically significant impact conferring a 10% survival advantage at 10-year and 18% at 15-year follow-up. The Kaplan-Meier survival curves comparing off-/on-pump BIMA and off-/on-pump LIMA-SVG patients demonstrated a 22% survival advantage for off-pump BIMA patients when compared with on-pump LIMA-SVG patients at 15-year follow-up.
Perioperative complications do not increase with the use of BIMAs. Long-term survival is optimized with off-pump CABG and BIMA grafting. The low morbidity and mortality rates in this series are likely due to the continuous evolution of technology and the adoption of less invasive options for CABG patients. A more widespread use of BIMAs in CABG patients would continue to improve the overall excellent short- and long-term results of this operation.
在冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)中,双侧内乳动脉(BIMA)的应用仍然远远不够。尽管先前的研究表明使用 BIMA 比仅使用左内乳动脉(LIMA)具有长期益处,但在当前的手术经验中缺乏对这些结果的验证。我们比较了来自同一机构的一组连续接受 CABG 患者的 17 年随访中,接受 BIMA 移植的患者与仅接受 LIMA 的患者在并发症和生存方面的差异,这些患者通过倾向评分匹配进行分组。
基于 22 个观察到的基线协变量,使用逻辑回归模型,以程序组为因变量,建立了代表患者接受 BIMA 或仅接受 LIMA 治疗的概率的倾向评分。使用最近邻匹配算法(贪婪 5-1 位数字匹配),为每组 928 例患者生成了两个平衡基线因素的患者队列。我们比较了两组患者在 30 天内的发病率和死亡率,以及在 5 年的间隔内直至 17 年的随访期间的长期生存情况。
BIMA 组住院和 30 天死亡率为 0.8%,LIMA-大隐静脉移植(SVG)组为 1.1%。两组患者在并发症、死亡率和/或住院时间方面无显著差异。BIMA 组中有 48.9%的患者为非体外循环,LIMA 组中有 51.3%的患者为非体外循环。无论使用何种类型的移植物,体外循环患者更有可能出现术后永久性中风和更长的术后住院时间。与仅使用 LIMA 相比,使用 BIMA 具有统计学意义上的生存优势,10 年时为 10%,15 年时为 18%。比较非体外循环/体外循环 BIMA 和非体外循环/体外循环 LIMA-SVG 患者的 Kaplan-Meier 生存曲线显示,与体外循环 LIMA-SVG 患者相比,15 年随访时非体外循环 BIMA 患者的生存优势为 22%。
使用 BIMA 不会增加围手术期并发症。非体外循环 CABG 和 BIMA 移植可优化长期生存。该系列的低发病率和死亡率可能是由于技术的不断发展以及对 CABG 患者采用了侵入性较小的选择。在 CABG 患者中更广泛地使用 BIMA 将继续改善该手术的短期和长期整体优异结果。