Does Age Affect the Short- and Long-Term Outcomes of Coronary Bypass Grafting?

Author(s):  
Pavan Ashwini Anand ◽  
Suresh Keshavamurthy ◽  
Ellis M. Shelley ◽  
Sibu Saha

AbstractThe etiology of coronary artery disease (CAD) is multifactorial, stemming from both modifiable and nonmodifiable risk factors such as age. Several studies have reported the effects of age on various outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). This article reviews age-related outcomes of CABG and offers direction for further studies in the field to create comprehensive, evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of CAD. Ninety-two primary sources were analyzed for relevance to the subject matter, of which 17 were selected for further analysis: 14 retrospective cohort studies, 2 randomized clinical trials, and 1 meta-analysis. Our review revealed four broad age ranges into which patients can be grouped: those with CAD (1) below the age of 40 years, (2) between the ages of 40 and 60 years, (3) between the ages of 60 and 80 years, and (4) at or above 80 years. Patients below the age of 40 years fare best overall with total arterial revascularization (TAR). Patients between the ages of 40 and 60 years also fare well with the use of multiarterial grafts (MAGs) whereas either MAGs or single-arterial grafts may be of significant benefit to patients at or above the age of 60 years, with younger and diabetic patients benefitting the most. Arterial grafting is superior to vein grafting until the age of 80 years, at which point there is promising evidence supporting the continued use of the saphenous vein as the favored graft substrate. Age is a factor affecting the outcomes of CABG but should not serve as a barrier to offering patients CABG at any age from either a cost or a health perspective. Operative intervention starts to show significant mortality consequences at the age of 80 years, but the increased risk is countered by maintenance or improvement to patients' quality of life.

Author(s):  
Pedro José Negreiros de Andrade ◽  
Hermano Alexandre Lima Rocha ◽  
João Luiz de Alencar Araripe Falcão ◽  
Antonio Thomaz de Andrade ◽  
Breno de Alencar Araripe Falcão

Circulation ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 140 (15) ◽  
pp. 1273-1284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mario Gaudino ◽  
Faisal G. Bakaeen ◽  
Umberto Benedetto ◽  
Antonino Di Franco ◽  
Stephen Fremes ◽  
...  

Observational and randomized evidence shows that arterial grafts have better patency rates than saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) in coronary artery bypass grafting. Observational studies suggest that the use of multiple arterial grafts is associated with longer postoperative survival, but this must be interpreted in the context of treatment allocation bias and hidden confounders intrinsic to the study designs. Recently, a pooled analysis of 6 randomized trials comparing the radial artery with the SVG as the second conduit and the largest randomized trial comparing the use of single and bilateral internal thoracic arteries have provided apparently divergent results about a clinical benefit with the use of >1 arterial conduit. However, both analyses have methodological limitations that may have influenced their results. At present, it is unclear whether the well-documented increased patency rate of arterial grafts translates into clinical benefits in the majority of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. A large randomized trial testing the arterial grafts hypothesis (ROMA [Randomized Comparison of the Clinical Outcome of Single Versus Multiple Arterial Grafts]) is underway and will report the results in a few years.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document