Nakatsu Taro, Tamura Nobushige, Yanagi Shigeki, Kyo Shoichi, Koshiji Takaaki, Sakata Ryuzo
Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Kumamoto Central Hospital, 1-5-1 Tainoshima, Kumamoto, 862-0965, Japan,
Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014 Aug;62(8):481-7. doi: 10.1007/s11748-014-0371-4. Epub 2014 Jan 23.
Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is known to have a poor prognosis. Some reports have also described poor late results after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). However, there have been few reports about whether bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting improves the long-term survival of PAD patients after CABG. We performed this study to clarify whether or not this is the case.
One hundred and thirty-six PAD patients who underwent elective CABG with two or more grafts were enrolled in this study. Patients were divided into two groups, 71 patients in the bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) group and 65 patients in the single internal thoracic artery (SITA) group. The maximum follow-up period was 19 years, with a mean of 5.7 ± 4.4 years.
We investigated the long-term results based on three factors; survival, freedom from cardiac death, and freedom from cardiac events. The 3-, 5- and 10-year survival rates in the BITA group were 83.0, 74.2, and 43.1%, respectively. And those in the SITA group were 79.4, 67.7, and 32.3%, respectively. There were no significant differences between the two groups (p = 0.5843). There were also no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of the freedom from cardiac death (p = 0.8589) or in the freedom from cardiac events (p = 0.9445).
No long-term advantage was observed for CABG with BITA in comparison to SITA alone in patients with PAD.
外周动脉疾病(PAD)预后较差。一些报告也描述了冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)后远期效果不佳。然而,关于双侧胸廓内动脉移植是否能提高PAD患者CABG后的长期生存率,相关报告较少。我们进行这项研究以明确情况是否如此。
136例行择期CABG且移植两根或更多血管的PAD患者纳入本研究。患者分为两组,71例为双侧胸廓内动脉(BITA)组,65例为单根胸廓内动脉(SITA)组。最长随访期为19年,平均为5.7±4.4年。
我们基于三个因素研究了长期结果;生存率、无心脏死亡生存率和无心脏事件生存率。BITA组的3年、5年和10年生存率分别为83.0%、74.2%和43.1%。SITA组的分别为79.4%、67.7%和32.3%。两组间无显著差异(p = 0.5843)。两组在无心脏死亡(p = 0.8589)或无心脏事件(p = 0.9445)方面也无统计学显著差异。
对于PAD患者,与单纯SITA相比,BITA行CABG未观察到长期优势。