Browsing by Author "Moat, Neil (57207515942)"

Background: We used a large patient-level data set including 6 angiographic randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on coronary artery bypass conduits to explore incidence and determinants of coronary graft failure. Methods: Patient-level angiographic data of 6 RCTs comparing long-term outcomes of the radial artery and other conduits were joined. Primary outcome was graft occlusion at maximum follow-up. The analysis was divided as (1) left anterior descending coronary (LAD) distribution and (2) non-LAD distribution (circumflex and right coronary artery). Mixed-model multivariable Cox regression including all baseline characteristics with stratification by individual trials was used to identify predictors of graft occlusion. Results: Included were 1091 patients and 2281 grafts, consisting of 921 left internal mammary arteries, 74 right internal mammary arteries, 710 radial arteries, and 576 saphenous veins. All left internal mammary arteries were used on the LAD, the other conduits were used on the non-LAD distribution. Mean angiographic follow up was 65 ± 29 months. Occlusion rates were 2.3% for the left internal mammary arteries, 13.5% for the left internal mammary arteries, 9.4% for the right internal mammary arteries, and 17.5% for the saphenous veins. At multivariable analysis, type of conduit used, age, female sex, left ventricular ejection fraction of less than 0.50, and use of the Y graft were significantly associated with graft occlusion in the non-LAD distribution. Conclusions: Our analyses showed that failure of the left internal mammary arteries-to-LAD bypass is a very uncommon event. For the non-LAD distribution, the nonuse of radial artery, age, female sex, left ventricular ejection fraction of less than 0.50, and use of the Y graft configuration were significantly associated with midterm graft failure. © 2020 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

Importance: Observational studies have suggested that the use of radial artery grafts for coronary artery bypass grafting may improve clinical outcomes compared with the use of saphenous vein grafts, but this has not been confirmed in randomized trials. Objective: To compare clinical outcomes between patients receiving radial artery vs saphenous vein grafts for coronary artery bypass grafting after long-term follow-up. Design, Setting, and Participants: Patient-level pooled analysis comparing radial artery vs saphenous vein graft in adult patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting from 5 countries (Australia, Italy, Serbia, South Korea, and the United Kingdom), with enrollment from 1997 to 2009 and follow-up completed in 2019. Interventions: Patients were randomized to undergo either radial artery (n = 534) or saphenous vein (n = 502) grafts for coronary artery bypass grafting. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization and the secondary outcome was a composite of death or myocardial infarction. Results: A total of 1036 patients were randomized (mean age, 66.6 years in the radial artery group vs 67.1 years in the saphenous vein group; 376 [70.4%] men in the radial artery group vs 351 [69.9%] in the saphenous vein group); 942 (90.9%) of the originally randomized patients completed 10 years of follow-up (510 in the radial artery group). At a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 10 (10-11) years, the use of the radial artery, compared with the saphenous vein, in coronary artery bypass grafting was associated with a statistically significant reduction in the incidence of the composite outcome of death, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization (220 vs 237 total events; 41 vs 47 events per 1000 patient-years; hazard ratio, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.61-0.88]; P <.001) and of the composite of death or myocardial infarction (188 vs 193 total events; 35 vs 38 events per 1000 patient-years; hazard ratio, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.63-0.94]; P =.01). Conclusions and Relevance: In this individual participant data meta-analysis with a median follow-up of 10 years, among patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting, the use of the radial artery compared with the saphenous vein was associated with a lower risk of a composite of cardiovascular outcomes. © 2020 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

Background: Few studies have evaluated the effect of chronic calcium-channel blocker therapy (CCB) on the angiographic and clinical outcome of radial artery (RA) grafts used for coronary bypass surgery. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate if CCB influences midterm clinical and angiographic outcomes of RA grafts. Methods: Patient-level data of 6 angiographic randomized trials evaluating RA graft status at midterm follow-up were joined in this observational analysis. Cox regression and propensity score methods were used to evaluate the effect of CCB on the incidence of a composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (death, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization) and graft occlusion. Results: The study population included 732 patients (502 on CCB). The median clinical follow-up was 60 months. The cumulative incidence of MACE at 36, 72, and 108 months was 3.7% vs. 9.3%, 13.4% vs. 17.6%, and 16.8% vs. 20.5% in the CCB and no CCB groups, respectively (log-rank p = 0.003). Protocol-driven angiographic follow-up was available in 243 patients in the CCB group and 200 in the no CCB group. The median angiographic follow-up was 55 months. The cumulative incidence of RA occlusion at 36, 72, and 108 months was 0.9% vs. 8.6%, 9.6% vs. 21.4%, and 14.3% vs. 38.9% in the CCB and no CCB groups, respectively (log-rank p < 0.001). After controlling for known confounding, CCB therapy was found to be consistently associated with a significantly lower risk of MACE (multivariate Cox hazard ratio: 0.52; 95% confidence interval: 0.31 to 0.89; p = 0.02) and RA graft occlusion (multivariate Cox hazard ratio: 0.20; 95% confidence interval: 0.08 to 0.49; p < 0.001). Conclusions: In patients with RA grafts CCB is associated with significantly better midterm clinical and angiographic RA outcomes. © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation

BACKGROUND The use of radial-artery grafts for coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) may result in better postoperative outcomes than the use of saphenous-vein grafts. However, randomized, controlled trials comparing radial-artery grafts and saphenous-vein grafts have been individually underpowered to detect differences in clinical outcomes. We performed a patient-level combined analysis of randomized, controlled trials to compare radial-artery grafts and saphenous-vein grafts for CABG. METHODS Six trials were identified. The primary outcome was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization. The secondary outcome was graft patency on follow-up angiography. Mixed-effects Cox regression models were used to estimate the treatment effect on the outcomes. RESULTS A total of 1036 patients were included in the analysis (534 patients with radialartery grafts and 502 patients with saphenous-vein grafts). After a mean (±SD) follow-up time of 60±30 months, the incidence of adverse cardiac events was significantly lower in association with radial-artery grafts than with saphenousvein grafts (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49 to 0.90; P = 0.01). At follow-up angiography (mean follow-up, 50±30 months), the use of radial-artery grafts was also associated with a significantly lower risk of occlusion (hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.70; P<0.001). As compared with the use of saphenous-vein grafts, the use of radial-artery grafts was associated with a nominally lower incidence of myocardial infarction (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.99; P = 0.04) and a lower incidence of repeat revascularization (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.63; P<0.001) but not a lower incidence of death from any cause (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.59 to 1.41; P = 0.68). CONCLUSIONS As compared with the use of saphenous-vein grafts, the use of radial-artery grafts for CABG resulted in a lower rate of adverse cardiac events and a higher rate of patency at 5 years of follow-up. (Funded by Weill Cornell Medicine and others.). © 2018 Massachusetts Medical Society.

It is generally accepted that radial artery (RA) grafts have better mid-term patency rate compared to saphenous vein grafts. However, the clinical correlates of the improved patency rate are still debated. Observational studies have suggested increased survival and event-free survival for patients who receive an RA rather than a saphenous vein, but they are open to bias and confounders. The only evidence based on randomized data is a pooled meta-analysis of 6 randomized controlled trial comparing the RA and the saphenous vein published by the RADial artery International Alliance (RADIAL). In the RADIAL database, improved freedom from follow-up cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction and repeat revascularization) was found at 5-year follow-up in the RA arm. The most important limitation of the RADIAL analysis is that most of the included trials had an angiographic follow-up in the first 5 years and it is unclear whether the rate of repeat revascularization (the main driver of the composite outcome) was clinically indicated due to per-protocol angiographies. Here, we present the protocol for the long-term analysis of the RADIAL database. By extending the follow-up beyond the 5th postoperative year (all trials except 1 did not have angiographic follow-up beyond 5 years), we aim to provide data on the role of RA in coronary artery bypass surgery with respect to long-term outcomes. © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.