What is the mortality and recuperative difference of bilateral versus single thoracic artery coronary revascularization in patients with reoperation or over 80 years of age?

Stavros Siminelakis, Constantine Anagnostopoulos, Ioannis Toumpoulis, Joseph DeRose, Demosthenes Katritsis, Daniel Swistel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: We examined whether bilateral internal thoracic artery revascularization (BITA) is safe for reoperative coronary revascularization (reop CABG) or primary CABG at age ≥80 (CABG ≥ 80 yrs) as, these two groups are thought to be at higher risk for death or sternal infection. Methods: We analyzed 329 such patients between January 1, 1993 and March 31, 2002. These are subgroups of 3200 prospectively New York State risk stratified patients for BITA or SITA (single internal thoracic artery revascularization) of equivalent preoperative risk. In 37/39, BITA ≥ 80 since 1996 (1996 ≥ 80) the microscope was used and the free right internal thoracic artery was anastomosed to the aorta. Long-term survival was analyzed by Kaplan-Meier curves and in particular among the 36 patients between 1996 and 1997, who were operated five and six years ago (1997 ≥ 80). Conclusions: Mortality and recuperative difference of BITA versus SITA in the reop CABG and CABG ≥ 80 years are negligible, as there was no significant difference in hospital mortality, sternal infections, LOS, or Kaplan-Meier survival curves and average long-term survival. However BITA appears to have long-term advantage over SITA in the newer period and beyond 48 months (1996-1997 ≥ 80).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)511-515
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Cardiac Surgery
Volume19
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 1 2004
Externally publishedYes

    Fingerprint

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this