Abstract
Objective
The use of bilateral internal thoracic arteries (BITAs) during coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) improves long-term and event-free survival compared with single internal thoracic artery (SITA) grafting. It is controversial whether BITA grafting alters in-hospital adverse events after CABG.
Methods
Isolated CABG cases using BITA or SITA at a single US academic center between January 1, 1997 and June 30, 2006 were retrospectively reviewed. A propensity score was used as a covariate to balance the treatment groups (BITA and SITA) with respect to 44 preoperative risk factors. A multivariable logistic regression model tested whether treatment type was significantly associated with in-hospital death, deep sternal wound infection (DSWI), or hospital length of stay (LOS).
Results
There were 599 BITA and 10,212 SITA cases performed. Overall for all BITA versus SITA cases, adjusted mortality (0.8% vs. 1.7%, P = 0.85) was not different between the groups. However, adjusted incidence of DSWI (2.0% vs. 1.2%, P = 0.036) and LOS (6.7 vs. 6.1, P = 0.025) were significantly higher in BITA patients. Subsets analyses of obese patients and diabetic patients revealed no statistical differences for any of the outcomes between BITA and SITA.
Conclusions
The long-term benefits of BITA grafting do not come at the cost of increased adjusted risk of in-hospital death. BITA grafting was associated with an increased risk of DSWI and a longer adjusted LOS. Neither obesity, nor diabetes significantly increased the risk of poor outcomes after BITA.