Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Bases de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Circulation ; 126(11 Suppl 1): S170-5, 2012 Sep 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22965979

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Radial artery (RA) grafts are an attractive second arterial conduit after the left internal thoracic artery (LITA) for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. However, long-term outcomes and the need for subsequent reintervention have not been defined. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of our single institution's 16-year experience with 1851 consecutive patients (average age, 58 years; 82% men, 36% diabetic) undergoing primary, isolated CABG with the LITA, RA, and saphenous vein as needed. Average grafts per patient were 3.8, with 2.4 arterial grafts per patient. Survival was determined using the Social Security Death Index. Grafts were nonpatent if they had a >50% stenosis, a string sign, or were occluded. Five patients (0.3%) died in hospital and 0.8% had a myocardial infarction, 1.1% a stroke, and 0.6% renal failure. Kaplan-Meier-estimated 1-, 5-, 10-, and 15-year survival was 99%, 96%, 89%, and 75%, respectively. Of the cohort, 278 symptomatic patients underwent cardiac catheterization at our institution an average of 5.0±3.8 years (range, 0.1-12 years) after CABG. Overall RA (n=420 grafts) patency was 82% and SV (n=364 grafts) patency, 47% (P<0.0001). LITA (n=287 grafts including 9 sequential grafts) patency was 85% and right internal thoracic artery (n=15 grafts) patency was 80% (P=0.6). RA patency was not different from LITA patency (P=0.3). Overall freedom from catheterization, percutaneous coronary intervention, and CABG was 85%, 97%, and 99%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: RA grafting is a highly effective revascularization strategy providing excellent short and long-term outcomes with very low rates of reintervention. RA patency is similar to LITA patency and is much better than SV patency. RA grafting should be more widely utilized in patients undergoing CABG.


Assuntos
Ponte de Artéria Coronária/métodos , Reestenose Coronária/cirurgia , Artéria Radial/cirurgia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Cateterismo Cardíaco , Reestenose Coronária/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Infarto do Miocárdio/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Reoperação/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Veia Safena/cirurgia , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/epidemiologia , Taxa de Sobrevida , Coleta de Tecidos e Órgãos , Resultado do Tratamento , Grau de Desobstrução Vascular
2.
Ann Thorac Surg ; 90(4): 1165-72, 2010 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20868808

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The second best conduit for coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) is unclear. We sought to determine if the use of a second arterial conduit, the radial artery (RA), would improve long-term survival after CABG using the left internal thoracic artery (LITA) and saphenous vein (SV). METHODS: We compared the 14-year outcomes in propensity-matched patients undergoing isolated, primary CABG using the LITA, RA, and SV versus CABG using the LITA and only SV. In all, 826 patients from each group had similar propensity-matched demographics and multiple variables. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality obtained using the Social Security Death Index. RESULTS: Perioperative outcomes including in hospital mortality (0.1% for the RA patients and 0.2% for the SV patients) were similar. Kaplan-Meier survival at 1, 5, and 10 years was 98.3%, 93.9%, and 83.1% for the RA group versus 97.2%, 88.7%, and 74.3% for the SV group (log rank, p = 0.0011). Cox proportional hazards models showed a lower all-cause mortality in the RA group (hazard ratio 0.72, confidence interval: 0.56 to 0.92, p = 0.0084). Ten-year survivals showed a 52% increased mortality for the SV patients (25.7%) versus the RA patients (16.9%; p = 0.0011). For symptomatic patients, RA patency was 80.7%, which was not different than the LITA patency rate of 86.4% but was superior to the SV patency rate of 46.7% (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Using the LITA, SV, and a RA conduit for CABG results in significantly improved long-term survival compared with using the LITA and SV. The use of two arterial conduits offers a clear and lasting survival advantage, likely due to the improved patency of RA grafts. We conclude that RA conduits should be more widely utilized during CABG.


Assuntos
Ponte de Artéria Coronária/mortalidade , Artéria Radial/transplante , Idoso , Ponte de Artéria Coronária/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Artéria Torácica Interna/transplante , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pontuação de Propensão , Estudos Retrospectivos , Veia Safena/transplante , Coleta de Tecidos e Órgãos/métodos , Resultado do Tratamento , Grau de Desobstrução Vascular
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA