Aortic Valve Replacement and Concomitant Multi-Vessel Coronary Artery Bypass: The Impact of Using the Bilateral Internal Thoracic Arteries on Early and Late Clinical Outcomes

• Published in: Journal of chest surgery Vol. 56; no. 3; pp. 197 - 203
• Main Authors: Heo, Muhyung, Kim, Myoung Young, Lee, Jun Ho, Chung, Suryeun, Sung, Kiick, Kim, Wook Sung, Cho, Yang Hyun
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Korea (South) The Korean Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 05.05.2023; Korean Society for Thoracic & Cardiovascular Surgery
• Subjects: aortic valve replacement; Clinical Research; coronary artery bypass; Coronary artery bypass; Aortic valve replacement
• ISSN: 2765-1606; 2765-1614
• DOI: 10.5090/jcs.22.122

The survival benefit of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) using the bilateral internal thoracic arteries (BITA) is well known; however, the role of BITA in concomitant aortic valve replacement (AVR) and CABG has not been studied. We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent concomitant AVR and CABG. Cases not using an internal thoracic artery and less than 2 bypass grafts were excluded. We enrolled 114 patients in this study. The mean follow-up duration was 61.5±43.5 months. Forty patients (35.1%) underwent CABG with a single internal thoracic artery (SITA) and 74 patients (64.9%) underwent CABG with BITA. The preoperative clinical characteristics were not significantly different between the 2 groups, with the exception of a higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation in the SITA group. Postoperative mortality and morbidity were not significantly higher in the BITA group than in the SITA group. In the univariable analysis, the survival of the BITA group was similar to that of the SITA group (p=0.157). Multivariable analysis showed that only mean age was a predictor of death (p=0.042), but using BITA was not an independent predictor (p=0.094). In low-risk patients whose preoperative ejection fraction was >45%, the survival of the BITA group was significantly better than that of the SITA group (p=0.043). BITA use in concomitant AVR and CABG showed no difference in mortality compared to using SITA. Although its impact on long-term survival was inconclusive, BITA use can be considered for low-risk patients.