RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Multi-arterial coronary bypass grafting with the left internal mammary artery as a conduit has been shown to offer superior long-term survival compared to single-arterial coronary bypass grafting. Nevertheless, the selection of a secondary conduit between the right internal mammary artery and the radial artery remains controversial. Using a national cohort, we examined the relationships between the right internal mammary artery and the radial artery with acute clinical and financial outcomes. METHODS: Adults undergoing on-pump multivessel coronary bypass grafting with left internal mammary artery as the first arterial conduit were identified in the 2016 to 2020 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Patients receiving either the right internal mammary artery or the radial artery, but not both, were included in the analysis. Multivariable regression models were fitted to examine the association between the conduits and in-hospital mortality, as well as additional secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Of an estimated 49,798 patients undergoing multi-arterial coronary bypass grafting, 29,729 (59.7%) comprised the radial artery cohort. During the study period, the proportion of multi-arterial coronary bypass grafting utilizing the radial artery increased from 51.3% to 65.2% (nptrend <0.001). Following adjustment, the radial artery was associated with reduced odds of in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio 0.44), prolonged mechanical ventilation (adjusted odds ratio 0.78), infectious complications (adjusted odds ratio 0.69), and 30-day nonelective readmission (adjusted odds ratio 0.77, all P < .05). CONCLUSION: Despite no definite endorsement from surgical societies, the radial artery is increasingly utilized as a secondary conduit in multi-arterial coronary bypass grafting. Compared to the right internal mammary artery, the radial artery was associated with lower odds of in-hospital mortality, complications, and reduced healthcare expenditures. These results suggest that whenever feasible, the radial artery should be the favored conduit over the right internal mammary artery. Nevertheless, future studies examining long-term outcomes associated with these vessels remain necessary.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Despite increasing use of minimally invasive surgical (MIS) techniques for trauma, limited large-scale studies have evaluated trends, outcomes, and resource utilization at centers that utilize MIS modalities for blunt abdominal trauma. METHODS: Operative adult admissions after blunt assault, falls, or vehicular collisions were tabulated from the 2016-2020 National Inpatient Sample. Patients who received diagnostic laparoscopy or other laparoscopic and robotic intervention were classified as MIS. Institutions with at least one MIS trauma operation in a year were defined as an MIS Performing Institution (MPI; rest: non-MPI). The primary endpoint was mortality, with secondary outcomes of reoperation, complication, postoperative length of stay (LOS), and hospitalization costs. Mixed regression models were used to determine the association of MPI status on the outcomes of interest. RESULTS: Throughout the study period, the proportion of MIS operations and MPI significantly increased from 22.6 to 29.8% and 45.9 to 58.8%, respectively. Of an estimated 77,480 patients, 66.7% underwent care at MPI. After adjustment, MPI status was not associated with increased odds of mortality (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] [.96,1.24]), reoperation (AOR 1.02, CI [.87,1.19]), or any of the tabulated complications. There was additionally no difference in adjusted LOS (ß-.18, CI [-.85, +.49]) or costs (ß+$1600, CI [-1600, +4800]), between MPI and non-MPI. DISCUSSION: The use of MIS operations in blunt abdominal trauma has significantly increased, with performing centers experiencing no difference in mortality or resource utilization. Prospectively collected data on outcomes following MIS trauma surgery is necessary to elucidate appropriate applications.
