Abstract

A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was ‘What is the best choice for third conduit when using bilateral internal mammary arteries for coronary artery bypass grafting—radial artery or saphenous vein graft?’. Altogether >525 papers were found using the reported search, of which 7 represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. Overall, there was no survival benefit demonstrated with the use of a radial artery over the use of a saphenous vein graft as a choice of third conduit following bilateral internal mammary artery grafts for coronary artery bypass grafting. The main limitation of the current evidence available is the restricted follow-up periods and the high attrition rates with small sample sizes affecting the strength of conclusions that can be drawn beyond 10 years of follow-up. We conclude that despite previous evidence supporting improved long-term patency of radial arterial grafts, there is no strong evidence that the use of a radial artery, over a saphenous vein graft, has any survival benefit when used as the third conduit following bilateral internal mammary artery grafts.

Details

Title
What is the best choice for third conduit when using bilateral internal mammary arteries for coronary artery bypass grafting—radial artery or saphenous vein graft?
Author
Kemp, Ursula 1   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; Davies, Reece A 1 

 Cardiothoracic Department, St George Hospital, Sydney, Australia 
Pages
735-738
Publication year
2022
Publication date
May 2022
Publisher
Oxford Publishing Limited (England)
ISSN
15699293
e-ISSN
15699285
Source type
Scholarly Journal
Language of publication
English
ProQuest document ID
3191821157
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.