|
|
||||||||
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2005;27:579-583
© 2005 Elsevier Science NL
a Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, JW Goethe University Clinic, Frankfurt, Germany
b Department of Radiology, JW Goethe University Clinic, Frankfurt, Germany
Received 14 February 2004; received in revised form 14 December 2004; accepted 29 December 2004.
* Corresponding author. Address: Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, JW Goethe University of Frankfurt, Theodor Stern Kai 7, 60590 Frankfurt, Germany. Tel.: +49 69 6301 5850; fax: +49 69 6301 5849. (E-mail: md.md{at}gmx.de).
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Key Words: Proximal anastomotic devices Patency Coronary artery bypass grafting
| 1. Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Ultrafast cardiac computed tomography (CT) as a noninvasive method for assessment of graft patency was suggested by the groups of Bateman (1987) and Stanford (1988), with a predictive accuracy of 96 and 92%, respectively. They concluded that technically adequate studies could be effectively performed in the majority of CABG patients. Despite a reasonable high temporal and spatial resolution of the scanner, limitations were seen in differentiation of obstructed and nonobstructed grafts. Details of proximal and distal anastomoses and the distal vasculature were not provided by recent CT scanners [4,5].
| 2. Materials and methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Neither intraoperative or postoperative echocardiography nor graft flow measurement was performed routinely. Postoperative anti platelet therapy consisted in acetylsalicyl acid 100mg once a day for both groups starting postoperative day 1. The study was approved by our institutional review board and written informed consent was obtained from all patients. Unpaired t-test was used for detecting demographic or perioperative differences of the investigated groups. Chi-square test was applied to test for significance in occlusion rates between groups. There were no statistical significant differences between groups for demographic and perioperative data, see Table 1.
|
In group II, 27 of the 62 venous grafts sutured to the aorta led to the area of the right coronary artery, three of these as jump grafts. Twenty-eight grafts had their target in the circumflex area, 14 jump grafts were performed. Four were anastomosed to a diagonal branch and three to an intermediate branch. Additionally, we created 36 arterial bypasses with the left internal mammary artery to the left anterior descending artery, three of them as jump graft to a diagonal branch. One LITA graft was anastomosed to a posterolateral branch. Three right internal mammaria arteries were used as bypass graft to the circumflex artery (one sequential graft). The number of distal anastomoses amounted to 123 in group II (3.2 anastomoses/patient).
2.3. MDCT follow up
To evaluate patency we performed ultrafast computer tomography (MDCT) on 34 patients (53 proximal anastomoses) of group I and 16 patients (25 proximal anastomoses) of group II on the fifth postoperative day. In our early MDCT patency control we focused on the anastomatic connector group, 16 patients of group II served to validate our method. For evaluation of intermediate term patency we contacted all patients to get them for MDCT (see Fig. 1). One year (11.4±5 months) after the operation, 30 patients of group I (46 proximal anastomoses) and 25 patients of group II (39 proximal anastomoses) were investigated.
|
During the hospital stay two patients died. One in the aortic connector group died 3 days after the operation of perioperative myocardial infarction. The other one was randomized to group II and died three month after the operation without having left hospital. Between hospital discharge and second follow up one patient of group I died for unknown reasons 14 month postoperatively, and another patient of group II died of noncardiac disease. We were able to include five patients of group I and 15 patients of group II who had not participated in the immediate postoperative follow up.
The patient with the perioperatively occluded vein graft (group I) was not reinvestigated. So in group I out of 36 patients amenable to follow up 30 were seen, two had contraindications to contrast media and four withdrew their consent. In group II out of 36 patients 25 were seen four had contraindications and seven withdrew their consent (see Fig. 1).
2.4. Image acquisition and reconstruction
The CT scans at the early postoperative examination were performed using a multidetector 4-row spiral CT (SOMATOM Plus 4 Volume Zoom WIP-Version VA 20, Siemens Inc, Forchheim, Germany). At the 1 year follow up MDCT examinations were performed on a 16-row spiral CT (Sensation 16, Siemens Inc., Forchheim, Germany).
Image reconstruction in all patients was performed using retrospective ECG gating, a technique that allowed continuous image reconstruction from volume data sets during any phase of the cardiac cycle. Adaptive Cardiac Volume (ACV)® technique-served as reconstruction algorithm. Depending on the heart rate this technique combines two different reconstruction procedures: single-segment reconstruction (
72bpm) and adaptive-segmental reconstruction (>72bpm). Single-segment reconstruction requires data from only one rotation, adaptive-segmental reconstruction from up to two rotations for the reconstruction of each 1.0mm slice.
| 3. Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
All in all we examined 55 patients at the 1 year follow up, 30 of the aortic connector group and 25 of the handsewn group. So we evaluated 85 proximal anastomoses at the 1 year follow up. Forty-six of these in the aortic connector group and 39 in the control group.
All patients were contacted and interviewed by us for the 1 year follow up. They were all in good clinical condition.
Of the 53 proximal anastomoses created with the aortic connector and evaluated at the perioperative follow up two were found to be occluded (3.8%). All other grafts were patent and had no stenosis at the proximal anastomotic site (see Fig. 2). But distal graft quality could not be examined for reasons of MDCT technique. There was no occlusion or proximal stenosis detected in the control group at the first follow up.
|
|
|
| 4. Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In our study group we observed a statistically nonsignificant trend towards increased occlusion rates in the aortic connector group. The percentage of occlusion in group I still meets occlusion rates described in the literature, whereas in our control group this percentage was lower. Statistical proof of this statement needs larger cohorts of patients. However, the SymmetryTM aortic connector may provide benefits if used in patients where aortic clamping is difficult or impossible, such as in minimally invasive procedures or in the case of calcified aortas. As it is our policy not to clamp or partially occlude a severely calcified aorta, these patients had to be excluded from this randomized trial, even if a partial calcification of the aorta may be a good indication for proximal anastomotic devices. A limitation of our trial is the fact that 29% of our patients initially included were not amenable for mid term follow up for reasons explained above.
We conclude, that occlusion rates of vein grafts anastomosed with the SymmetryTM aortic connector are equal to those described in the literature but showed a decreased intermediate term patency compared to our handsewn control group in this randomized study. Larger patient cohorts should be investigated to evaluate long term patency of grafts connected to the aorta using metal implants. MDCT provides reliable data on graft patency and quality of proximal anastomoses, even in the presence of nitinol implants.
| Appendix A. Conference discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Dr Dietrich: It was just one of the perioperative findings that we had, for example, was there vascular disease or something like that, but the univariate analysis did not show any difference in any of these factors that could give us a hint for this occlusion rate.
Dr R. Gallo (Khamis Mushayt, Saudi Arabia): Could you please tell us which kind of antiplatelet aggregation do you use for the connectors? Are they the same as the other CABG?
Dr Dietrich: We applied aspirin, 100mg, as with the hand-sewn CABG group II. We did not change the therapy.
Dr Gallo: Just a short comment. Because we are starting to use it, we took this protocol from other groups, and they say that with the presence of nitinol, you can use clopidogrel, 75mg/day. Some groups say three months and other groups say six months. We are following the six-month protocol, and we are following by the same method like you, by ultrafast CT scan, and until now, we are just starting with only 27 patients, but we didn't find any occlusion.
Dr P. Tozzi (Lausanne, Switzerland): I have a question concerning the study design. You didn't measure the flow into the bypass, and I think it is difficult to compare the two groups if you have no information concerning the coronary runoff in the two groups. Could you comment?
Dr Dietrich: This is correct, we didn't measure the flow. With another study oncoming we would do though, that is correct. We have no data from this point, yes.
Dr R. Poston (Baltimore, MD, USA): First, you showed a CT angiogram with a Symmetry graft going to the right coronary that looked like it was kinked, because it did not come off into the right AV groove. Measuring flow might have pointed out that graft was taking an acute turn which compromised that particular graft that you showed us; presumably there were others in your series.
Second, the 15% graft thrombosis rate in your connector group is about on par with what you might see with early follow-up with most vein grafts. The less than expected 3% rate in the hand sewn group may have been influenced from the extensive loss to follow-up in that group. For instance, one guy died of an MI in that group prior to CT angio, who likely had an unmeasured graft thrombosis.
Mr V. Zamvar (Edinburgh, UK): My question is similar to the last one. Do you have any information on why there was such a large dropout in the two groups, particularly in the hand sewn group?
Dr Dietrich: No, we have no idea why in the hand sewn group we had such a small rate of occlusion or of stenosis. We couldn't discover any data giving us a idea why this difference occurred.
Dr P. Sergeant (Leuven, Belgium): You have no information on these patients? They were completely lost to follow-up?
Dr Dietrich: Patients lost to follow-up which we contacted but didn't want to come again for being examined, they were all well but just didn't want to go on with this.
Dr Sergeant: I have some residual problems with the study design. You have stated that this study is randomized. I see no power calculation. Has this study gone through the ethical committee of the hospital, because then the patients probably have agreed on this secondary evaluation in your study project?
Dr Dietrich: Well, they did agree to this second examination, but they just took back their agreement.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
Presented at the joint 17th Annual Meeting of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery and the 11th Annual Meeting of the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons, Vienna, Austria, October 1215, 2003. | References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
W. J.L. Suyker and C. Borst Coronary connector devices: analysis of 1,469 anastomoses in 1,216 patients. Ann. Thorac. Surg., May 1, 2008; 85(5): 1828 - 1836. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Bergmann, K. Meszaros, S. Huber, P. Oberwalder, H. Machler, G. Schaffler, R. Rienmueller, and B. Rigler Forty-one-month follow-up of the Symmetry aortic connector system for proximal venous anastomosis J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., July 1, 2007; 134(1): 23 - 28. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ANN THORAC SURG | ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN | EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG |
| J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG | ICVTS | ALL CTSNet JOURNALS |