Minimal clinically important differences in patient-reported outcomes after coronary artery bypass surgery in the arterial revascularization trial.

OBJECTIVES: This article identifies minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) in quality of life (QoL) measures among patients who had coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and were enrolled in the arterial revascularization trial (ART). METHODS AND RESULTS: The European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) and the Short Form Health Survey 36-Item (SF-36) physical component (PC) and mental component (MC) scores were recorded at baseline, 5 years and 10 years in ART. The MCIDs were calculated as changes in QoL scores anchored to 1-class improvement in the New York Heart Association functional class and Canadian Cardiovascular Society scale at 5 years. Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate associations between MCIDs and mortality. Patient cohorts were examined for the SF-36 PC (N = 2671), SF-36 MC (N = 2815) and EQ-5D (N = 2943) measures, respectively. All QoL scores significantly improved after CABG compared to baseline. When anchored to the New York Heart Association, the MCID at 5 years was 17 (95% confidence interval: 17-20) for SF-36 PC, 14 (14-17) for the SF-36 MC and 0.12 (0.12-0.15) for EQ-5D. Using the Canadian Cardiovascular Society scale as an anchor, the MCID at 5 years was 15 (15-17) for the SF-36 PC, 12 (13-15) for the SF-36 MC and 0.12 (0.11-0.14) for the EQ-5D. The MCIDs for SF-36 PC and EQ-5D at 5 years were associated with a lower risk of mortality at the 10-year follow-up point after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: MCIDs for CABG patients have been identified. These thresholds may have direct clinical applications in monitoring patients during follow-up and in designing new trials that include QoL as a primary study outcome. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN46552265.

Bilateral internal thoracic artery use in coronary artery bypass grafting in the post-ART era - Perspective.

There is still lack of convincing evidence about the superiority of bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) use in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and BITA grafts continue to be underutilized. Arterial Revascularization Trial (ART) did not demonstrate the superiority of BITA versus single ITA grafting after 10 years. We have reviewed the most recent literature, assessed the current status as well as indications of BITA grafting in the post-ART era. We believe that BITA grafting is not appropriate for all patients especially in light of the findings of ART. However, the use of BITA is justified in patients of younger age and those without comorbidities (poorly controlled diabetes, obesity, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, previous mediastinal irradiation, long-term steroid use, elderly women). Further prospective randomized studies with long-term follow-up are needed to validate the benefits of BITA grafting.