Bilateral internal mammary artery grafts in reoperative and primary coronary bypass surgery

• Published in: The Annals of thoracic surgery Vol. 52; no. 1; pp. 20 - 28
• Main Authors: Galbut, David L., Traad, Ernest A., Dorman, Malcolm J., DeWitt, Paul L., Larsen, Parry B., Kurlansky, Paul A., Button, Jaclyn H., Ally, Joan M., Gentsch, Thomas O.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New York, NY Elsevier Inc 01-07-1991; Elsevier Science
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Angina Pectoris - etiology; Biological and medical sciences; Coronary Artery Bypass - adverse effects; Coronary Artery Bypass - mortality; Electrocardiography; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Internal Mammary-Coronary Artery Anastomosis - adverse effects; Internal Mammary-Coronary Artery Anastomosis - mortality; Length of Stay; Male; Medical sciences; Middle Aged; Myocardial Infarction - diagnosis; Myocardial Infarction - etiology; Recurrence; Reoperation; Retrospective Studies; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases; Survival Rate; Vascular Patency; Vascular surgery: aorta, extremities, vena cava. Surgery of the lymphatic vessels; Human; Reoperation; Treatment; Surgery; Cardiovascular disease; Bilateral; Internal mammary artery; Technique; Coronary heart disease; Graft surgical
• ISSN: 0003-4975; 1552-6259
• DOI: 10.1016/0003-4975(91)91411-N

Bilateral internal mammary artery grafting is recognized as a preferred method of myocardial revascularization. However, its efficacy in coronary bypass reoperation has not been clearly established. From January 1982 through June 1989, 88 patients underwent coronary bypass reoperation with bilateral internal mammary artery grafts. Results were compared with those for a subset of 88 patients receiving primary revascularization with bilateral internal mammary artery grafts who were computer matched for sex, age, left ventricular function, anginal classification, and left main coronary artery disease. In each group, 62.5% (55 patients) had unstable angina, 43.2% (38 patients) had reduced ejection fraction, and 21.6% (19 patients) in the reoperation group and 20.5% (18 patients) in the reference group had left main coronary artery disease. Hospital mortality for the reoperation group was 6.8% (6 patients) and for the reference group, 3.4% (3 patients). No significant difference was found in the incidence of reoperation for bleeding, sternal infection, or stroke in the two groups. The incidence of respiratory insufficiency in the reoperation group was 13.6% (12 patients) and in the reference group, 3.4% (3 patients) (
p < 0.015). Recurrent angina occurred in 13.7% (10 patients) of patients in the reoperation group and 13.3% (10 patients) in the reference group. The long-term survival at 5 years for the reoperation group was 85.3% ± 5.6% (±standard error of the mean) and for the reference group, 91.6% ± 3.1%. No significant difference was found in the equality of survival distribution for the two groups. The results of this comparative study demonstrate that bilateral internal mammary artery grafting can be accomplished with an acceptable operative risk in patients undergoing reoperation. Further, survivors of reoperation experience long-term survival benefits and functional improvement similar to those receiving primary coronary bypass surgery.