Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

OBJECTIVES: This meta-analysis compares total arterial revascularization (TAR) versus conventional coronary artery bypass and additionally to two arterial grafts. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE Databases from 1996-to-2016 for studies comparing TAR versus non-TAR for multi-vessel surgical revascularization. Data were extracted by 2 independent investigators. Meta-analysis used random effects, which incorporates heterogeneity. RESULTS: There were 4 smaller shorter follow-up randomized controlled trials (RCTs), plus 15 matched/adjusted and 6 unmatched/unadjusted larger longer follow-up observational studies that met inclusion criteria (N=130.305 patients; mean follow-up range: 1-15years). There were no differences in perioperative stroke, myocardial infarction or mortality. However, TAR was associated with lower long term all-cause mortality in observational studies matched/adjusted for confounders (incident rate ratio 0.85, 95% CI: 0.81-0.89, p<0.0001; I2=0%) and unmatched/unadjusted (incident rate ratio 0.67, 95% CI: 0.59-0.76, p<0.0001; I2=67%) for TAR. Decreases in major cardiovascular outcomes and revascularization did not achieve statistical significance. There were greater sternal complications with TAR in the matched/adjusted studies (pooled risk ratio 1.21, 95% CI: 1.03-1.42, p=0.02; I2=0%). When compared to patients with two arterial grafts, TAR was still associated with reduced long-term all-cause mortality (incident rate ratio 0.85, 95% CI: 0.73-0.99, p=0.04) with minimal heterogeneity (I2=5%). CONCLUSIONS: Data from primarily observational studies suggest that TAR may improve long-term survival compared with conventional coronary bypass by 15-20% even when compared with two arterial grafts. Prospective randomized trials of TAR with long term follow-up are needed.

Original publication

DOI

10.1016/j.ijcard.2017.02.010

Type

Journal article

Journal

Int J Cardiol

Publication Date

15/04/2017

Volume

233

Pages

29 - 36

Keywords

Coronary artery bypass graft, Graft patency, Total arterial revascularization, Coronary Angiography, Coronary Artery Bypass, Coronary Artery Disease, Coronary Vessels, Follow-Up Studies, Global Health, Humans, Myocardial Revascularization, Survival Rate, Time Factors