Kieser Teresa M, Rose M Sarah, Aluthman Uthman, Narine Kishan
Department of Cardiac Sciences, LIBIN Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2014 May;45(5):e142-50. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezu024. Epub 2014 Feb 26.
Skeletonization of the internal mammary artery (IMA) facilitates arterial grafting and has been shown to reduce deep sternal infection but is more time-consuming and tedious than pedicle harvest. We wished to determine if use of harmonic technology (HT) facilitates skeletonization of the IMA and is as safe as the conventional technique of skeletonization.
In a consecutive series of 1057 patients with isolated coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery from 2003 to 2013, adverse events and recorded harvest times were compared between harmonic (965 patients) and non-harmonic patients (86 patients).
HT was used to harvest 1640 IMAs in 965 (91%) of 1057 consecutive CABG patients and skeletonization with the traditional technique (use of an electrocautery tip as a dissector) was used to harvest 147 IMAs in 86 patients. Six patients had no IMA harvested with this surgery (4 patients had an IMA used from a previous CABG, 1 had no disease of the left anterior descending coronary artery and 1 patient was in cardiogenic shock precluding IMA use). Excluding patients with single-vessel disease, 730/987 (74%) of patients received bilateral IMAs. Demographics of patients with and without harmonic skeletonization, respectively, were the following: mean age: 64.7 vs 67.7 years; diabetes: 33 vs 34%; women: 21 vs 26% and median European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation: 2.9 vs 3.2. The mean harvest time for 77 non-harmonic skeletonized mammary arteries (49 surgeries) was 32.2 min (95% confidence interval (CI): 30.1, 34.3), for harmonic skeletonized arteries after 450 surgeries was 28.4 min, (95% CI: 27.8, 29.1) and in the last 100 IMAs harvested for the isolated harmonic device use/mammary was 15.4 min (95% CI: 14.0, 16.7). Major adverse events for patients with and without harmonic skeletonization, respectively, were: reoperation for bleeding: 2.7 vs 3.5% (difference = 0.8%, 95% CI: -3.2, 4.8); damaged mammaries: 0.4 vs 0.7% (difference = 0.3%, 95% CI: -1.0, 1.7); deep sternal infection: 1.6 vs 1.2% (difference = -0.4%, 95% CI: -2.8, 2.0) and perioperative infarction: 1.7 vs 2.3% (difference = 0.7%, 95% CI: -2.6, 4.0).
In this largest series to date of harmonic IMA skeletonization, this technique results in rare damage, is quicker and with a comparable adverse event rate compared with the non-harmonic method.
胸廓内动脉(IMA)骨骼化有助于动脉移植,且已证明可减少深部胸骨感染,但比带蒂取材更耗时、更繁琐。我们希望确定使用谐波技术(HT)是否有助于IMA骨骼化,以及是否与传统的骨骼化技术一样安全。
在2003年至2013年连续进行的1057例孤立冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)患者中,比较了使用谐波技术的患者(965例)和未使用谐波技术的患者(86例)的不良事件及记录的取材时间。
在1057例连续CABG患者中的965例(91%)中,使用HT取材1640条IMA,在86例患者中使用传统技术(使用电灼头作为解剖器)进行骨骼化取材147条IMA。6例患者在此次手术中未取材IMA(4例患者使用了先前CABG术中获取的IMA,1例患者左前降支冠状动脉无病变,1例患者因心源性休克无法使用IMA)。排除单支血管病变患者后,987例患者中的730例(74%)接受了双侧IMA取材。使用和未使用谐波骨骼化技术患者的人口统计学数据分别如下:平均年龄:64.7岁对67.7岁;糖尿病:33%对34%;女性:21%对26%;欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统中位数:2.9对3.2。77条非谐波骨骼化乳内动脉(49例手术)的平均取材时间为32.2分钟(95%置信区间(CI):30.1,34.3),450例手术后谐波骨骼化动脉的平均取材时间为28.4分钟(95%CI:27.8,29.1),在最后仅使用谐波设备取材的100条IMA中平均取材时间为15.4分钟(95%CI:14.0,16.7)。使用和未使用谐波骨骼化技术患者的主要不良事件分别为:因出血再次手术:2.7%对3.5%(差异=0.8%,95%CI:-3.2,4.8);乳内动脉损伤:0.4%对0.7%(差异=0.3%,95%CI:-1.0,1.7);深部胸骨感染:1.6%对1.2%(差异=-0.4%,95%CI:-2.8,2.0);围手术期梗死:1.7%对2.3%(差异=0.7%,95%CI:-2.6,4.0)。
在迄今为止最大规模谐波IMA骨骼化系列研究中,与非谐波方法相比,该技术导致的损伤罕见,速度更快,不良事件发生率相当。