Stefan Thelin, Ivy Susanne Modrau, Olov Duvernoy, Magnus Dalén, Mats Dreifaldt, Anders Ericsson, Örjan Friberg, Anders Holmgren, Per Hostrup Nielsen, Henrik Hultkvist, Karin Jensevik Eriksson, Anders Jeppsson, Mats Lidén, Shahab Nozohoor, Sigurdur Ragnarsson, Ulrik Sartipy, Lisa Ternström, Raquel Themudo, Per Vikholm, Stefan James
{"title":"No-touch vein grafts in coronary artery bypass surgery: a registry-based randomized clinical trial","authors":"Stefan Thelin, Ivy Susanne Modrau, Olov Duvernoy, Magnus Dalén, Mats Dreifaldt, Anders Ericsson, Örjan Friberg, Anders Holmgren, Per Hostrup Nielsen, Henrik Hultkvist, Karin Jensevik Eriksson, Anders Jeppsson, Mats Lidén, Shahab Nozohoor, Sigurdur Ragnarsson, Ulrik Sartipy, Lisa Ternström, Raquel Themudo, Per Vikholm, Stefan James","doi":"10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and Aims No-touch saphenous vein harvesting may enhance graft patency and improve clinical outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Methods In this registry-based, randomized trial, patients undergoing CABG were randomly assigned to no-touch or conventional harvesting. The primary composite outcome was the proportion of patients with occluded/stenosed >50% vein graft on coronary computed tomography angiography, or who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention to a vein graft, or died. Secondary outcomes included clinical outcomes and leg wound complications. Results A total of 902 patients were enrolled with a mean total number of distal vein anastomoses of 2.0 (SD 0.87). The primary endpoint occurred in 90/454 (19.8%) of patients randomized to no-touch and in 107/446 (24.0%) of patients randomized to the conventional technique [difference, −4.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval (CI) −10.1–1.6; P = .15] at a mean follow-up time of 3.5 (SD 0.1) years. The composite of death, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization at 4.4 (SD 1.3) years occurred in 57/454 (12.6%) and 44/446 (9.9%) in the no-touch and conventional groups, respectively (hazard ratio 1.3; 95% CI, 0.87–1.93). Leg wound complications were more common in patients assigned to no-touch harvesting at 3 months [107/433 (24.7%) vs. 59/427 (13.8%); difference, 10.9 percentage points; 95% CI 5.7–16.1]. At 2 years, 189/381 (49.6%) vs. 91/361 (25.2%) had remaining leg symptoms (difference, 24.4 percentage points; 95% CI 17.7–31.1). Conclusions No-touch vein graft harvesting for CABG was not superior to conventional open harvesting in reducing vein graft failure or clinical events after CABG but increased leg wound complications. The primary outcome requires cautious interpretation due to a lower-than-expected number of primary events.","PeriodicalId":11976,"journal":{"name":"European Heart Journal","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":37.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Heart Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf018","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and Aims No-touch saphenous vein harvesting may enhance graft patency and improve clinical outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Methods In this registry-based, randomized trial, patients undergoing CABG were randomly assigned to no-touch or conventional harvesting. The primary composite outcome was the proportion of patients with occluded/stenosed >50% vein graft on coronary computed tomography angiography, or who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention to a vein graft, or died. Secondary outcomes included clinical outcomes and leg wound complications. Results A total of 902 patients were enrolled with a mean total number of distal vein anastomoses of 2.0 (SD 0.87). The primary endpoint occurred in 90/454 (19.8%) of patients randomized to no-touch and in 107/446 (24.0%) of patients randomized to the conventional technique [difference, −4.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval (CI) −10.1–1.6; P = .15] at a mean follow-up time of 3.5 (SD 0.1) years. The composite of death, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization at 4.4 (SD 1.3) years occurred in 57/454 (12.6%) and 44/446 (9.9%) in the no-touch and conventional groups, respectively (hazard ratio 1.3; 95% CI, 0.87–1.93). Leg wound complications were more common in patients assigned to no-touch harvesting at 3 months [107/433 (24.7%) vs. 59/427 (13.8%); difference, 10.9 percentage points; 95% CI 5.7–16.1]. At 2 years, 189/381 (49.6%) vs. 91/361 (25.2%) had remaining leg symptoms (difference, 24.4 percentage points; 95% CI 17.7–31.1). Conclusions No-touch vein graft harvesting for CABG was not superior to conventional open harvesting in reducing vein graft failure or clinical events after CABG but increased leg wound complications. The primary outcome requires cautious interpretation due to a lower-than-expected number of primary events.
期刊介绍:
The European Heart Journal is a renowned international journal that focuses on cardiovascular medicine. It is published weekly and is the official journal of the European Society of Cardiology. This peer-reviewed journal is committed to publishing high-quality clinical and scientific material pertaining to all aspects of cardiovascular medicine. It covers a diverse range of topics including research findings, technical evaluations, and reviews. Moreover, the journal serves as a platform for the exchange of information and discussions on various aspects of cardiovascular medicine, including educational matters.
In addition to original papers on cardiovascular medicine and surgery, the European Heart Journal also presents reviews, clinical perspectives, ESC Guidelines, and editorial articles that highlight recent advancements in cardiology. Additionally, the journal actively encourages readers to share their thoughts and opinions through correspondence.