Department of Cardiac Surgery, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University.
Circ J. 2020 Feb 25;84(3):436-444. doi: 10.1253/circj.CJ-19-1050. Epub 2020 Jan 30.
This analysis compared short-term mortality, sternal wound infection (SWI), and long-term survival outcomes in diabetic patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with bilateral (BIMA) vs. single (SIMA) internal mammary artery, as well as in diabetic vs. non-diabetic patients undergoing BIMA grafting.
Nineteen studies were included in the study, covering 21,143 different patients. Of these patients, 6,464 underwent CABG with BIMA, 10,264 underwent CAGB with SIMA, 11,584 had diabetes, and 6,717 did not. Compared with SIMA, BIMA had a significantly lower risk of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.73, P=0.02), but a significantly higher risk of SWI (OR 1.30, P=0.04). However, compared with non-diabetic patients who underwent CABG with BIMA, diabetic patients with BIMA grafting did not have significantly higher risks of either mortality (OR 1.22, P=0.53) or SWI (OR 1.10, P=0.72). No significant differences were detected with different harvesting techniques. Longer term, BIMA was associated with a significantly higher rate of survival than SIMA (hazard ratio [HR] 0.76, P<0.001).
Results from the 2 types of comparisons indicate that BIMA is a preferable option for diabetic patients, even though it has a higher risk of infection. CABG with BIMA is also associated with a long-term survival benefit.
本分析比较了行冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)时使用双侧内乳动脉(BIMA)与单侧内乳动脉(SIMA)、糖尿病患者与非糖尿病患者行 BIMA 移植的短期死亡率、胸骨伤口感染(SWI)和长期生存结局。
研究纳入了 19 项研究,共涵盖了 21143 名不同的患者。这些患者中,6464 例行 CABG 联合 BIMA,10264 例行 CABG 联合 SIMA,11584 例患有糖尿病,6717 例没有。与 SIMA 相比,BIMA 院内死亡率风险显著降低(比值比 [OR] 0.73,P=0.02),但 SWI 风险显著升高(OR 1.30,P=0.04)。然而,与行 BIMA 搭桥术的非糖尿病患者相比,行 BIMA 搭桥术的糖尿病患者的死亡率(OR 1.22,P=0.53)或 SWI(OR 1.10,P=0.72)风险并无显著升高。不同的采集技术之间没有发现显著差异。长期来看,BIMA 与 SIMA 相比,生存率显著更高(风险比 [HR] 0.76,P<0.001)。
这 2 种比较的结果表明,即使 BIMA 感染风险较高,对于糖尿病患者来说,BIMA 也是一个更优的选择。BIMA 搭桥术也与长期生存获益相关。