Florida Medical Center, Tenet Healthcare Corp, Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA.
Circulation. 2012 Dec 18;126(25):2935-42. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.112.117606. Epub 2012 Nov 19.
The prevalence of diabetes mellitus is increasing at an unprecedented rate, affecting nearly 8% of the population. Previous studies have demonstrated a potential benefit for surgical over interventional revascularization in this group of patients. Similarly, studies have shown the superiority of bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) grafting over single internal mammary artery (SIMA) grafting in select populations. However, concerns about sternal wound infection have discouraged the use of BIMA grafting in diabetics. Therefore, we studied the long-term results of BIMA versus SIMA grafting in a large population of diabetic patients in whom BIMA grafting was broadly applied.
Between February 1972 and May 1994, 1107 consecutive diabetic patients underwent coronary artery bypass grafting with either SIMA (n=646) or BIMA (n=461) grafting. Optimal matching with the propensity score was used to create matched SIMA (n=414) and BIMA (n=414) cohorts. Cross-sectional follow-up (6 weeks to 30.1 years; mean, 8.9 years) determined long-term survival. There was no difference in operative mortality, sternal wound infection, or total complications between matched SIMA and BIMA groups (operative mortality, 10 of 414 [2.4%] versus 13 of 414 [3.1%]; P=0.279; sternal wound infection, 7 of 414 [1.7%] versus 13 of 414 [3.1%]; P=0.179); total complications, 71 of 414 [17.1%] versus 71 of 414 [17.1%]; P=1.000). Late survival was significantly enhanced with the use of BIMA grafting (median survival: SIMA, 9.8 years versus BIMA, 13.1 years; P=0.001). Use of BIMA was found to be associated with late survival on Cox regression (P=0.003).
Compared with SIMA grafting, BIMA grafting in propensity score-matched patients provides diabetics with enhanced survival without any increase in perioperative morbidity or mortality.
糖尿病的患病率正以前所未有的速度增长,影响着近 8%的人口。先前的研究表明,对于这组患者,手术血管重建优于介入血管重建。同样,研究表明,在某些人群中,双侧内乳动脉(BIMA)搭桥优于单侧内乳动脉(SIMA)搭桥。然而,胸骨伤口感染的担忧阻碍了在糖尿病患者中使用 BIMA 搭桥。因此,我们研究了在广泛应用 BIMA 搭桥的大量糖尿病患者中,BIMA 与 SIMA 搭桥的长期结果。
1972 年 2 月至 1994 年 5 月期间,1107 例连续的糖尿病患者接受了冠状动脉旁路移植术,其中 SIMA 组(n=646)和 BIMA 组(n=461)。使用倾向评分进行最佳匹配,创建了匹配的 SIMA(n=414)和 BIMA(n=414)队列。在 6 周到 30.1 年(平均 8.9 年)的时间内进行了横断面随访,以确定长期生存率。在匹配的 SIMA 和 BIMA 组之间,手术死亡率、胸骨伤口感染或总并发症没有差异(手术死亡率:SIMA 组 10/414[2.4%]与 BIMA 组 13/414[3.1%];P=0.279;胸骨伤口感染:SIMA 组 7/414[1.7%]与 BIMA 组 13/414[3.1%];P=0.179);总并发症:SIMA 组 71/414[17.1%]与 BIMA 组 71/414[17.1%];P=1.000)。使用 BIMA 搭桥显著提高了晚期生存率(中位生存率:SIMA 组为 9.8 年,BIMA 组为 13.1 年;P=0.001)。Cox 回归分析显示,使用 BIMA 与晚期生存相关(P=0.003)。
与 SIMA 搭桥相比,在倾向评分匹配的患者中,BIMA 搭桥可提高糖尿病患者的生存率,而不会增加围手术期发病率或死亡率。