Thelin Stefan, Modrau Ivy Susanne, Duvernoy Olov, Dalén Magnus, Dreifaldt Mats, Ericsson Anders, Friberg Örjan, Holmgren Anders, Hostrup Nielsen Per, Hultkvist Henrik, Jensevik Eriksson Karin, Jeppsson Anders, Lidén Mats, Nozohoor Shahab, Ragnarsson Sigurdur, Sartipy Ulrik, Ternström Lisa, Themudo Raquel, Vikholm Per, James Stefan
Department of Thoracic Surgery, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden.
Department of Surgical Sciences, Thoracic Surgery, Uppsala University, Sweden.
Eur Heart J. 2025 May 7;46(18):1720-1729. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf018.
No-touch saphenous vein harvesting may enhance graft patency and improve clinical outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).
In this registry-based, randomized trial, patients undergoing CABG were randomly assigned to no-touch or conventional harvesting. The primary composite outcome was the proportion of patients with occluded/stenosed >50% vein graft on coronary computed tomography angiography, or who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention to a vein graft, or died. Secondary outcomes included clinical outcomes and leg wound complications.
A total of 902 patients were enrolled with a mean total number of distal vein anastomoses of 2.0 (SD 0.87). The primary endpoint occurred in 90/454 (19.8%) of patients randomized to no-touch and in 107/446 (24.0%) of patients randomized to the conventional technique [difference, -4.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval (CI) -10.1-1.6; P = .15] at a mean follow-up time of 3.5 (SD 0.1) years. The composite of death, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization at 4.4 (SD 1.3) years occurred in 57/454 (12.6%) and 44/446 (9.9%) in the no-touch and conventional groups, respectively (hazard ratio 1.3; 95% CI, 0.87-1.93). Leg wound complications were more common in patients assigned to no-touch harvesting at 3 months [107/433 (24.7%) vs. 59/427 (13.8%); difference, 10.9 percentage points; 95% CI 5.7-16.1]. At 2 years, 189/381 (49.6%) vs. 91/361 (25.2%) had remaining leg symptoms (difference, 24.4 percentage points; 95% CI 17.7-31.1).
No-touch vein graft harvesting for CABG was not superior to conventional open harvesting in reducing vein graft failure or clinical events after CABG but increased leg wound complications. The primary outcome requires cautious interpretation due to a lower-than-expected number of primary events.
非接触式大隐静脉获取术可能会提高冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)后移植血管的通畅率并改善临床结局。
在这项基于注册登记的随机试验中,接受CABG的患者被随机分配至非接触式或传统获取术组。主要复合结局为在冠状动脉计算机断层扫描血管造影中静脉移植血管闭塞/狭窄>50%的患者比例、接受静脉移植血管经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的患者比例或死亡患者比例。次要结局包括临床结局和腿部伤口并发症。
共纳入902例患者,远端静脉吻合的平均总数为2.0(标准差0.87)。在平均随访时间3.5(标准差0.1)年时,主要终点事件在随机分配至非接触式获取术组的90/454例(19.8%)患者中发生,在随机分配至传统技术组的107/446例(24.0%)患者中发生[差异为-4.3个百分点;95%置信区间(CI)-10.1至1.6;P = 0.15]。在4.4(标准差1.3)年时,非接触式组和传统组分别有57/454例(12.6%)和44/446例(9.9%)患者发生死亡、心肌梗死或再次血运重建的复合事件(风险比1.3;95% CI,0.87至1.93)。在3个月时,分配至非接触式获取术组的患者腿部伤口并发症更常见[107/433例(24.7%)对59/427例(13.8%);差异为10.9个百分点;95% CI 5.7至16.1]。在2年时,189/381例(49.6%)对91/361例(25.2%)患者仍有腿部症状(差异为24.4个百分点;95% CI 17.7至31.1)。
CABG的非接触式静脉移植血管获取术在降低CABG后静脉移植血管失败或临床事件方面并不优于传统开放获取术,但会增加腿部伤口并发症。由于主要事件数量低于预期,对主要结局需谨慎解读。