Bisleri Gianluigi, Di Bacco Lorenzo, Turturiello Dario, Mazzoletti Angelica, Giroletti Laura, Repossini Alberto, Muneretto Claudio
Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Brescia Medical School, Brescia, Italy.
Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Brescia Medical School, Brescia, Italy.
Ann Thorac Surg. 2017 Feb;103(2):517-525. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.06.028. Epub 2016 Aug 28.
Despite the proven advantages of total arterial grafting in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass operation, its benefits in the elderly population at long-term follow-up have been widely debated to date.
Among 988 consecutive patients scheduled to undergo coronary artery bypass grafting operation, we performed a propensity-matched analysis in a population with double and triple vessel disease and older than 70 years and compared patients receiving total arterial grafting (G1; n = 315 patients) with conventional myocardial revascularization (left internal mammary artery on left anterior descending coronary artery plus saphenous vein grafts; G2; n = 201 patients). Two groups of 175 patients were obtained after matching. Primary end points were overall survival and survival free from cardiac-related mortality, whereas secondary end point was the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs; cardiac death, myocardial infarction, repeated revascularization on grafted vessels, stroke).
Preoperative and intraoperative patients' characteristics were similar among the groups, as well the incidence of hospital mortality (none in both groups). At a median follow-up time of 89 months, total arterial grafting was associated with significantly improved actuarial overall survival (G1: 67.5% ± 4.6%, G2: 57.0% ± 4.4%, p = 0.029), survival free from cardiac-related mortality (G1: 86.9% ± 3.4%, G2: 75.9 ± 4.0%, p = 0.02), and occurrence of MACCEs (G1: 78.8 ± 3.9%, G2: 65.5% ± 4.4%, p = 0.017). Multivariate Cox regression analysis depicted conventional myocardial revascularization as an independent predictor of cardiac-related mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 2.5, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3 to 4.8, p = 0.005) and MACCEs (HR 2.1, 95% CI: 1.2 to 3.4, p = 0.005).
Total arterial myocardial revascularization in elderly patients is associated with a reduced late incidence of cardiac-related mortality and major cerebral and cardiovascular events compared with the use of saphenous grafts, thereby providing improved long-term benefits also in this specific subset of patients.
尽管冠状动脉搭桥手术中全动脉搭桥已被证实具有优势,但其在老年人群长期随访中的益处至今仍存在广泛争议。
在988例计划接受冠状动脉搭桥手术的连续患者中,我们对患有双支和三支血管病变且年龄大于70岁的人群进行了倾向匹配分析,并将接受全动脉搭桥的患者(G1组;n = 315例患者)与传统心肌血运重建患者(左乳内动脉至左前降支冠状动脉加隐静脉移植;G2组;n = 201例患者)进行比较。匹配后得到两组各175例患者。主要终点为总体生存率和无心脏相关死亡率的生存率,次要终点为主要不良心血管和脑血管事件(MACCEs;心源性死亡、心肌梗死、移植血管再次血运重建、中风)的发生情况。
各组患者术前和术中特征相似,医院死亡率发生率也相似(两组均无)。在中位随访时间89个月时,全动脉搭桥与显著改善的精算总体生存率相关(G1组:67.5%±4.6%,G2组:57.0%±4.4%,p = 0.029),无心脏相关死亡率的生存率(G1组:86.9%±3.4%,G2组:75.9%±4.0%,p = 0. .02),以及MACCEs的发生情况(G1组:78.8%±3.9%,G2组:65.5%±4.4%,p = 0.017)。多因素Cox回归分析表明,传统心肌血运重建是心脏相关死亡率(风险比[HR] 2.5,95%置信区间[CI]:1.3至4.8,p = 0.005)和MACCEs(HR 2.1,95% CI:1.2至3.4,p = 0.005)的独立预测因素。
与使用隐静脉移植相比,老年患者全动脉心肌血运重建与心脏相关死亡率以及主要脑和心血管事件的晚期发生率降低相关,从而在这一特定患者亚组中也提供了更好的长期益处。