Reoperative approach after extra-anatomic ascending-to-descending aortic bypass graft.

BACKGROUND: Extra-anatomic ascending-to-descending aortic bypass grafts have historically been utilized as a safe and effective solution for repairs of complex coarctation of the aorta. However, reports on reoperation in these patients remain rare. We present a case of an aortic valve replacement and coronary artery bypass grafting in a patient with an extra-anatomic ascending-to-descending aortic bypass graft. CASE PRESENTATION: The patient is a 59-year-old male with a complex aortic history, including repair of aortic coarctation with an ascending-to-descending aortic bypass graft 13 years prior, was admitted to the hospital for shortness of breath and chest pain that had developed over the past year. On further workup, he was found to have severe bileaflet aortic valve stenosis, non-ST elevation myocardial infarction, and moderate coronary artery disease. He underwent surgical aortic valve replacement and coronary artery bypass grafting. Given his unique anatomy, cardiopulmonary bypass approach involved separate cannulation of the right axillary and left common femoral arteries with cross-clamp of both the aorta and the extra-anatomic graft. Using this approach, the redo operation was successfully performed. CONCLUSIONS: Reports on reoperation after ascending-to-descending aortic bypass grafting are rare. We describe our approach to cardiopulmonary bypass and reoperation in a patient with an extra-anatomic ascending-to-descending aortic bypass graft.

A meta-analysis supporting the superiority of staged carotid artery stenting and coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with concurrent severe coronary and carotid artery stenosis.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to ascertain whether a staged approach involving carotid artery stenting (CAS) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) holds superiority over the synchronous (Syn) strategy of CAS or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and CABG in patients necessitating combined revascularization for concurrent carotid and coronary artery disease. METHOD: Studies were identified through 3 databases: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Statistical significance was defined as a P value of less than .05 for all analyses, conducted using STATA version 12.0. RESULTS: In the comparison between staged versus Syn CAS and CABG for patients with concomitant severe coronary and carotid stenosis, 4 studies were analyzed. The staged procedure was associated with a lower rate of 30-day stroke (OR = 8.329, 95% CI = 1.017-69.229, P = .048) compared to Syn CAS and CABG. In the comparison between staged CAS and CABG versus Syn CEA and CABG for patients with concomitant severe coronary and carotid stenosis, 5 studies were examined. The staged CAS and CABG procedure was associated with a lower rate of mortality (OR = 2.046, 95% CI = 1.304-3.210, P = .002) compared to Syn CEA and CABG. CONCLUSION: The Syn CAS and CABG was linked to a higher risk of peri-operative stroke compared to staged CAS and CABG. Additionally, patients undergoing staged CAS and CABG exhibited a significantly decreased risk of 30-day mortality compared to Syn CEA and CABG. Future randomized trials or prospective cohorts are essential to confirm and validate these findings.

Robot-Assisted MIDCAB Using Bilateral Internal Thoracic Artery: A Propensity Score-Matched Study With OPCAB Patients.

OBJECTIVE: Robot-assisted minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (RA-MIDCAB) is an attractive strategy for coronary revascularization. Growing evidence supports the use of total arterial grafting in coronary surgery. We evaluated total arterial left-sided coronary revascularization with bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) using RA-MIDCAB and compared it with a propensity score-matched (PSM) off-pump CAB (OPCAB) surgery population. METHODS: We retrospectively included all isolated OPCAB and RA-MIDCAB surgery using BITA without saphenous vein graft from January 1, 2015, to October 31, 2022. We analyzed all our RA-MIDCAB patients and performed PSM to compare them with our OPCAB population. Primary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and mortality. Secondary outcomes were surgical parameters, length of hospital stay, and learning curve. RESULTS: We included 601 OPCAB and 77 RA-MIDCAB procedures, which resulted in 2 cohorts of 54 patients after PSM. Mortality and MACCE survival analysis showed no significant difference. There was less blood transfusion in the RA-MIDCAB (16.7%) compared with the OPCAB group (38.9%; P = 0.02). We observed fewer intensive care unit (ICU) admissions (24.1% vs 96.6%), shorter ICU stay (0.78 ± 1.7 vs 1.91 ± 1.01 days), and shorter hospital stay (6.78 ± 2.4 vs 8.01 ± 2.5 days) in the RA-MIDCAB versus OPCAB group (P < 0.01). Surgery time decreased from 400.0 ± 70.8 to 325.0 ± 38.0 min with more experience in RA-MIDCAB BITA harvesting (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This is a first publication of 77 consecutive RA-MIDCAB BITA harvesting for left coronary artery system revascularization. This technique is safe in terms of MACCE and mortality. Additional advantages are shorter length of hospital stay, fewer ICU admissions, and less blood transfusion.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation for Protected Catheter Ablation in A Post-Cardiotomy Patient With Electrical Storm.

ABSTRACT: An electrical storm (ES) refers to multiple occurrences of ventricular arrhythmias within a short time. Catheter ablation is a treatment option for ES but can be challenging in unstable cardiovascular patients. We present the case of a 50-year-old patient with poor left ventricular function who experienced ES after emergency coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Despite maximal antiarrhythmic therapy, the patient had recurrent ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation (VT/VF), hindering catheter ablation. Elective venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support was established, allowing a successful second catheter ablation attempt without complications. The patient was weaned off ECMO the following day and remained in normal sinus rhythm.

Comparative analysis of del Nido cardioplegia versus blood cardioplegia in isolate coronary artery bypass grafting.

BACKGROUND: This study examined the efficacy of del Nido cardioplegia compared with traditional blood cardioplegia in adult cardiac surgery for isolated coronary artery bypass grafting by evaluating the early postoperative outcomes. METHODS: A total of 119 patients who underwent isolated conventional coronary artery bypass grafting were enrolled and divided into two groups (del Nido cardioplegia group [n = 36] and blood cardioplegia group [n = 50]) based on the type of cardioplegia used. This study compared the preoperative characteristics, intraoperative data, and early postoperative outcomes. Further subgroup analyses were conducted for high-risk patient groups. RESULTS: The 30-day mortality and morbidity rates were not significantly different between groups. The del Nido cardioplegia group exhibited advantageous myocardial protection outcomes, demonstrated by a significantly smaller rise in Troponin I levels post-surgery (2.8 [-0.4; 4.2] vs. 4.5 [2.9; 7.4] ng/mL, p = 0.004) and fewer defibrillation attempts during weaning off of cardiopulmonary bypass (0.0 ± 0.2 vs. 0.4 ± 1.1 times, p = 0.011) when compared to the blood cardioplegia group. Additionally, the del Nido group achieved a reduction in surgery duration, as evidenced by the reduced aortic cross-clamping time (64.0 [55.5; 75.5] vs. 77.5 [65.0; 91.0] min, p = 0.001) and total operative time (287.5 [270.0; 305.0] vs. 315.0 [285.0; 365.0] min, p = 0.008). Subgroup analyses consistently demonstrated that the del Nido cardioplegia group had a significantly smaller postoperative increase in Troponin I levels across all subgroups (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: del Nido cardioplegia provided myocardial protection and favorable early postoperative outcomes compared to blood cardioplegia, making it a viable option for conventional coronary artery bypass grafting. Establishing a consensus on the protocol for Del Nido cardioplegia administration in adult surgeries is needed.

Anomalous right coronary artery managed with bypass and proximal ligation.

BACKGROUND: An anomalous origin and inter-arterial course of the right coronary artery is a rare anomaly that can lead to sudden ischemic cardiac death if left untreated. We present a case of a patient with an anomalous right coronary artery originating from the left coronary sinus and an inter-arterial course that was managed with coronary artery bypass surgery using a suitable internal mammary artery conduit. The proximal right coronary artery was ligated to prevent competitive flow. CASE PRESENTATION: A 69 year-old-male with a ten-year history of intermittent chest pain and dyspnea with a negative workup underwent a cardiac catheterization, which showed an anomalous right coronary artery (RCA) originating from the left coronary sinus, with an inter-arterial course between the ascending aorta and pulmonary artery, and approximately 70% narrowing of the proximal RCA. The patient underwent an on-pump coronary artery bypass using the right internal mammary artery (RIMA) as a conduit, with segment 2 of the RCA being the target. The proximal RCA was ligated. Intra-operatively, there were no signs of ischemia or arrhythmia. The patient was successfully taken off cardiopulmonary bypass and eventually discharged home. CONCLUSION: Symptomatic anomalous origin of the right coronary artery with an inter-arterial course can be treated successfully with coronary artery bypass surgery with the internal mammary artery as a conduit. Ligation of the proximal right coronary artery is essential to minimize competitive flow through the bypass graft.

Impact of minimal invasive extracorporeal circulation on systemic inflammatory response - a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal circulation causes a systemic inflammatory response, that may cause postoperative haemodynamic instability and end-organ dysfunction. This study aimed to investigate the impact of minimal invasive extracorporeal circulation (MiECC) on the systemic inflammatory response compared with conventional extracorporeal circulation (CECC). METHODS: Patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting were randomized to MiECC (n = 30) and CECC (n = 30). Primary endpoint was tumor necrosis factor-α. Secondary endpoints were other biochemical markers of inflammation (IL1ß, IL6 and IL8, C-reactive protein, leukocytes), and markers of inadequate tissue perfusion and tissue damage (lactate dehydrogenase, lactate and creatine kinase-MB). In addition, we registered signs of systemic inflammatory response syndrome, haemodynamic instability, atrial fibrillation, respiratory dysfunction, and infection. RESULTS: Patients treated with MiECC showed significantly lower levels of tumor necrosis factor-α than CECC during and early after extracorporeal circulation (median: MiECC 3.4 pg/mL; CI 2.2-4.5 vs. CECC 4.6 pg/mL; CI 3.4-5.6; p = 0.01). Lower levels of creatine kinase-MB and lactate dehydrogenase suggested less tissue damage. However, we detected no other significant differences in any other markers of inflammation, tissue damage or in any of the clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Lower levels of TNF-α after MiECC compared with CECC may reflect reduced inflammatory response, although other biochemical markers of inflammation were comparable. Our results suggest better end-organ protection with MiECC compared with CECC. Clinical parameters related to systemic inflammatory response were comparable in this study. CLINICAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03216720.

Preoperative coronary interventions for preventing acute myocardial infarction in the perioperative period of major open vascular or endovascular surgery.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative myocardial infarction (POMI) is associated with major surgeries and remains the leading cause of mortality and morbidity in people undergoing vascular surgery, with an incidence rate ranging from 5% to 20%. Preoperative coronary interventions, such as coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), may help prevent acute myocardial infarction in the perioperative period of major vascular surgery when used in addition to routine perioperative drugs (e.g. statins, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and antiplatelet agents), CABG by creating new blood circulation routes that bypass the blockages in the coronary vessels, and PCI by opening up blocked blood vessels. There is currently uncertainty around the benefits and harms of preoperative coronary interventions. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of preoperative coronary interventions for preventing acute myocardial infarction in the perioperative period of major open vascular or endovascular surgery. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, LILACS, and CINAHL EBSCO on 13 March 2023. We also searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs that compared the use of preoperative coronary interventions plus usual care versus usual care for preventing acute myocardial infarction during major open vascular or endovascular surgery. We included participants of any sex or any age undergoing major open vascular surgery, major endovascular surgery, or hybrid vascular surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes of interest were acute myocardial infarction, all-cause mortality, and adverse events resulting from preoperative coronary interventions. Our secondary outcomes were cardiovascular mortality, quality of life, vessel or graft secondary patency, and length of hospital stay. We reported perioperative and long-term outcomes (more than 30 days after intervention). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included three RCTs (1144 participants). Participants were randomised to receive either preoperative coronary revascularisation with PCI or CABG plus usual care or only usual care before major vascular surgery. One trial enrolled participants if they had no apparent evidence of coronary artery disease. Another trial selected participants classified as high risk for coronary disease through preoperative clinical and laboratorial testing. We excluded one trial from the meta-analysis because participants from both the control and the intervention groups were eligible to undergo preoperative coronary revascularisation. We identified a high risk of performance bias in all included trials, with one trial displaying a high risk of other bias. However, the risk of bias was either low or unclear in other domains. We observed no difference between groups for perioperative acute myocardial infarction, but the evidence is very uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 4.57; 2 trials, 888 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One trial showed a reduction in incidence of long-term (> 30 days) acute myocardial infarction in participants allocated to the preoperative coronary interventions plus usual care group, but the evidence was very uncertain (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.28; 1 trial, 426 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was little to no effect on all-cause mortality in the perioperative period when comparing the preoperative coronary intervention plus usual care group to usual care alone, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.31 to 2.04; 2 trials, 888 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of preoperative coronary interventions on long-term (follow up: 2.7 to 6.2 years) all-cause mortality (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.80; 2 trials, 888 participants; very low-certainty evidence). One study reported no adverse effects related to coronary angiography, whereas the other two studies reported five deaths due to revascularisations. There may be no effect on cardiovascular mortality when comparing preoperative coronary revascularisation plus usual care to usual care in the short term (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.32; 1 trial, 426 participants; low-certainty evidence). Preoperative coronary interventions plus usual care in the short term may reduce length of hospital stay slightly when compared to usual care alone (mean difference -1.17 days, 95% CI -2.05 to -0.28; 1 trial, 462 participants; low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of the evidence due to concerns about risk of bias, imprecision, and inconsistency. None of the included trials reported on quality of life or vessel graft patency at either time point, and no study reported on adverse effects, cardiovascular mortality, or length of hospital stay at long-term follow-up. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative coronary interventions plus usual care may have little or no effect on preventing perioperative acute myocardial infarction and reducing perioperative all-cause mortality compared to usual care, but the evidence is very uncertain. Similarly, limited, very low-certainty evidence shows that preoperative coronary interventions may have little or no effect on reducing long-term all-cause mortality. There is very low-certainty evidence that preoperative coronary interventions plus usual care may prevent long-term myocardial infarction, and low-certainty evidence that they may reduce length of hospital stay slightly, but not cardiovascular mortality in the short term, when compared to usual care alone. Adverse effects of preoperative coronary interventions were poorly reported in trials. Quality of life and vessel or graft patency were not reported. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence most frequently for high risk of bias, inconsistency, or imprecision. None of the analysed trials provided significant data on subgroups of patients who could potentially experience more substantial benefits from preoperative coronary intervention (e.g. altered ventricular ejection fraction). There is a need for evidence from larger and homogeneous RCTs to provide adequate statistical power to assess the role of preoperative coronary interventions for preventing acute myocardial infarction in the perioperative period of major open vascular or endovascular surgery.

Application of the radial artery after angiography in patients undergoing total arterial coronary revascularization.

OBJECTIVE: There is growing evidence supporting the utilization of the radial artery as a secondary arterial graft in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery. However, debates continue over the recovery period of the radial artery following angiography. This study aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes and experiences related to the use of the radial artery post-angiography in total arterial coronary revascularization. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on data from patients who underwent total arterial CABG surgery at the University of Hong Kong Shenzhen Hospital from July 1, 2020, to September 30, 2022. Preoperative assessments included ultrasound evaluations of radial artery blood flow, diameter, intimal integrity, and the Allen test. Additionally, pathological examinations of the distal radial artery and coronary artery CT angiography were conducted, along with postoperative follow-up to assess the safety and efficacy of using the radial artery in patients undergoing total arterial CABG. RESULTS: A total of 117 patients, compromising 102 males and 15 females with an average age of 60.0 ± 10.0 years, underwent total arterial CABG. The internal mammary artery was used in situ in 108 cases, while in 4 cases, it was grafted to the ascending aorta due to length limitations. Bilateral radial arteries were utilized in 88 patients, and bilateral internal mammary arteries in 4 patients. Anastomoses of the proximal radial arteries to the proximal ascending aorta included 42 cases using distal T-anastomosis and 4 using sequential grafts. The interval between bypass surgery and coronary angiography ranged from 7 to 14 days. Pathological examination revealed intact intima and continuous elastic membranes with no significant inflammatory infiltration or hyperplastic lumen stenosis in the radial arteries. There were no hospital deaths, 3 cases of perioperative cerebral infarction, 1 secondary thoracotomy for hemorrhage control, 21 instances of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) assistance, and 2 cases of poor wound healing that improved following debridement. CT angiography performed 2 weeks post-surgery showed no internal mammary artery occlusions, but 4 radial artery occlusions were noted. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound may be used within 2 weeks post-angiography to assess the recovery of the radial artery in some patients. Radial arteries with intact intima may be considered in conjunction with the internal mammary artery for total arterial coronary CABG. However, long-term outcomes of these grafts require further validation through larger prospective studies.

Endoscopic Vein Harvesting - How Do We Do It?

The saphenous vein graft (SVG) remains the most used conduit as a second graft in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (CABG).1 Traditionally, surgeons harvest SVG with an open approach, making a long incision along the medial part of the leg or thigh. This procedure can potentially result in important complications, such as delayed wound healing, postoperative pain and infection.2 Thus, less invasive techniques for vessel harvesting have grown in popularity. Endoscopic vein harvesting (EVH) is a minimally invasive harvesting procedure, which only requires a short incision, leading to less wound complications and a faster return to normal daily activities. This article intends to describe how we do EVH technique in our centre, from the preparation of the patient to the postoperative period and share some tips and tricks from our experience.

In a rat model of bypass DuraGraft ameliorates endothelial dysfunction of arterial grafts.

Coronary artery bypass surgery can result in endothelial dysfunction due to ischemia/reperfusion (IR) injury. Previous studies have demonstrated that DuraGraft helps maintain endothelial integrity of saphenous vein grafts during ischemic conditions. In this study, we investigated the potential of DuraGraft to mitigate endothelial dysfunction in arterial grafts after IR injury using an aortic transplantation model. Lewis rats (n = 7-9/group) were divided in three groups. Aortic arches from the control group were prepared and rings were immediately placed in organ baths, while the aortic arches of IR and IR + DuraGraft rats were preserved in saline or DuraGraft, respectively, for 1 h before being transplanted heterotopically. After 1 h after reperfusion, the grafts were explanted, rings were prepared, and mounted in organ baths. Our results demonstrated that the maximum endothelium-dependent vasorelaxation to acetylcholine was significantly impaired in the IR group compared to the control group, but DuraGraft improved it (control: 89 ± 2%; IR: 24 ± 1%; IR + DuraGraft: 48 ± 1%, p < 0.05). Immunohistochemical analysis revealed decreased intercellular adhesion molecule-1, 4-hydroxy-2-nonenal, caspase-3 and caspase-8 expression, while endothelial cell adhesion molecule-1 immunoreactivity was increased in the IR + DuraGraft grafts compared to the IR-group. DuraGraft mitigates endothelial dysfunction following IR injury in a rat bypass model. Its protective effect may be attributed, at least in part, to its ability to reduce the inflammatory response, oxidative stress, and apoptosis.

Aprotinin in high-risk isolated coronary artery bypass graft patients: a 3-year propensity matched study.

BACKGROUND: Aprotinin, a serine protease inhibitor, has been used variably in cardiac surgery amidst ongoing debates about its safety following several previous studies. This study assesses the outcomes of aprotinin in high-risk isolated Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (iCABG) patients. METHODS: The study retrospectively analysed a cohort of 1026 iCABG patients, including 51 patients who underwent aprotinin treatment. Logistic regression powered score matching was employed to compare aprotinin patients with a control group, in a propensity-matched cohort of 96 patients. The primary outcome measured was in-hospital death, with secondary outcomes including renal dysfunction, stroke, myocardial infarction, re-exploration for bleeding or tamponade, and postoperative stay durations. RESULTS: The aprotinin cohort had high-risk preoperative patients with significantly higher EUROSCORE II values, 7.5 (± 4.2), compared to 3.9 (± 2.5) in control group. However, aprotinin group showed no statistically significant increase (p-value: 0.44) in hospital mortality with OR 2.5 [95% CI 0.51, 12.3]. Major secondary outcome rates of renal replacement therapy and postoperative stroke compared to the control group were also statistically insignificant between the two groups. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that aprotinin may be safely used in a select group of high-risk iCABG patients. The reintroduction of aprotinin under specific conditions reflects its potential benefits in managing bleeding in high-risk surgeries, but also underscores the complexity of its risk-benefit profile in such critical care settings. Nonetheless, it highlights the importance of carefully selecting patients and conducting additional research, including larger and more controlled studies to fully comprehend the potential risks and benefits of aprotinin.

Delayed management of acute type A aortic dissection with concomitant coronary artery bypass graft.

BACKGROUND: Pre-operative coronary angiography and concomitant, planned coronary artery bypass are infrequently performed with type A aortic dissection repair. We present a case in which pre-operative coronary computed tomography angiography was appropriate, and subsequent dissection repair and concomitant coronary artery bypass were successfully performed. CASE PRESENTATION: The patient is a 58-year-old male with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, renal insufficiency, hypertension, obesity, and smoking history, who presented with a three-to-four-day history of persistent back pain, worsening exertional dyspnea, and orthopnea, as well as a two-to-three month history of dyspnea, lower extremity edema, and intermittent angina. He was diagnosed with an acute type A aortic dissection and anti-impulse control was initiated. However, repair was delayed in order to allow apixaban to metabolize and decrease the risk of bleeding, as the patient was approximately six days post-dissection, without malperfusion, with a well-controlled blood pressure on anti-impulse therapy, and had received five days of anticoagulation. During this time, coronary computed tomography angiography was performed to assess the need for concomitant revascularization and showed coronary artery disease. Ascending aorta hemiarch replacement with aortic valve resuspension, two-vessel coronary artery bypass grafting, and left atrial appendage clipping were performed successfully. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-operative imaging can be considered in a select group of acute type A aortic dissections that present without malperfusion, and with well-controlled blood pressure on anti-impulse/negative inotropic therapy.

Controversy. On pump or off pump: what will I do when I grow up? A narrative systematic review.

The transition from the second to the third millennium happened to be a turning point in the history of myocardial revascularization on a beating heart, which moved from technical development to critical evaluation. This article describes how the initial acceptance and spread of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCABG) was followed by the general perception that the technique could not fulfill the expectations placed in it and provides some insight on what should we do with the know-how of OPCABG in the present and the future of coronary surgical revascularization.

[Surgical treatment of coronary artery to pulmonary artery fistula with a saccular aneurysm]. / Trattamento chirurgico di una grande fistola coronarica tra arteria discendente anteriore e arteria polmonare, di grosso aneurisma sacculare e di coronaropatia severa trivasale.

A 60-year-old man with hypercholesterolemia and hypertension presented with acute coronary syndrome (SCA). The ECG showed lateral ischemia (T-wave inversion in V4-V6, D1 and aVL) and echocardiography showed normal left ventricular wall motion. Coronary angiography showed critical atherosclerotic lesions in the distal part of the left circumflex artery (LCx, culprit lesion), chronic total occlusion of the right coronary artery (RCA), significant but not critical stenosis in the middle part of left anterior descending artery (LAD), and a coronary artery to pulmonary artery (PA) fistula originating from the proximal part of the LAD and emptying into the PA via a coronary saccular aneurysm (12 x 12 x 10 mm). A multidetector row computed tomography angiography (CTA) confirmed the coronary artery fistula, which was treated with surgical approach. The patient underwent aneurysmorrhaphy with CAF closure and coronary artery bypass grafting on the RCA and LCx. The postoperative course was uneventful and the patient was discharged on postoperative day 14. CTA was useful for understanding the spatial relation of the CAF and the connection with the PA.

The role of concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting in acute type A aortic dissection complicated by coronary malperfusion.

OBJECTIVES: Managing acute type A aortic dissection with coronary malperfusion is challenging. This study outlines our revascularization strategy for these patients. METHODS: Patients undergoing surgery for acute type A aortic dissection with coronary malperfusion and aortic root involvement from January 2000 to December 2021 were included. Patients were classified using the Neri classification for coronary dissection, including a novel 'Neri -' class (no coronary dissection). Patients undergoing revascularization either as a planned or as a bailout strategy due to persisting low cardiac output were compared additionally. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 195 patients: 43 (22%) Neri -, 43 (22%) Neri A, 74 (38%) Neri B and 35 (18%) Neri C. Aortic root replacement was mainly performed in 25 Neri C patients (71%; P < 0.001). Concomitant bypass surgery was performed in 4 (9%) of Neri -, 5 (12%) of Neri A, 21 (28%) of Neri B and 32 (91%) of Neri C patients (P < 0.001). Thirty-day mortality was 42% with 21 (49%) Neri -, 12 (28%) Neri A, 30 (41%) Neri B and 19 (54%) Neri C patients (P = 0.087). Bailout revascularization was primarily performed in 11 Neri B patients (69%; P = 0.001) and associated with a higher 30-day mortality of 81% compared to 48% for planned revascularization (P = 0.042). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative outcomes in case of coronary malperfusion are poor, irrespective of the anatomic dissection pattern. The decision for concomitant bypass surgery is crucial but may be considered in Neri C patients combined with aortic root replacement. Bailout revascularization was most common in Neri B and showed dismal outcome.

Mid-term outcomes of endoscopic vein harvesting in coronary artery bypass grafting: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic vein harvesting (EVH) is an alternative technique to obtain the saphenous vein for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery. We aimed to evaluate the early and mid-term outcomes of patients with EVH in CABG. METHODS: This cohort study included consecutive isolated CABG patients in Nanjing First Hospital from July 2020 to December 2022 using propensity score matching methods. Patients were classified to EVH group and open vein harvesting (OVH) group according to the vein harvesting methods. The primary outcome was the all-cause death, and the secondary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) including cardiovascular death, heart failure, myocardial infarction and revascularization and asymptomatic survival in the follow-up. RESULTS: Totally 1247 patients were included in the study with 849 in OVH group and 398 in EVH group. Patients with EVH were more female, diabetes, higher body mass index, more multi-vessel and left main diseases. 308 pairs were formed after the matching. There was no significant difference in the rates of in-hospital death (EVH vs. OVH, 2.3% vs. 1.3%, P = 0.543). During the 3 years follow-up, EVH grafts were considered not inferior to OVH grafts, no differences were found in all-cause death [8.5% vs. 5.0%, hazard ratio (HR) 1.565, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.77-3.17, P = 0.21], MACEs (8.1% vs. 7.1%, HR 1.165, 95CI: 0.51-2.69, P = 0.71) and asymptomatic survival (66.7% vs. 72.5%, HR 1.117, 95%CI: 0.65-1.92, P = 0.68). CONCLUSIONS: EVH grafts were considered comparable to OVH grafts in patients following CABG in the 3 years follow-up.