Zeshu LiI; Luqi LiuII
ABSTRACTObjective: To evaluate the patency of individual and sequential coronary artery bypass in patients with ischemic heart disease.
CABG = Coronary artery bypass grafting
CIs = Confidence intervals
Cl = Control
CT = Computed tomography
EMBASE = Excerpta Medica database
LAD = Left anterior descending
NOS = Newcastle Ottawa Scale
PDA = Posterior descending artery
PRISMA = Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
RCA = Right coronary artery
RRs = Risk ratios
SMD = Standardized mean difference
Ischemic heart disease is currently the leading cause of death worldwide and will account for 14.2% of all deaths by 2030. Also, it is a major contributor to societal costs of cardiac disease. Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is one of the common surgeries for cardiac patients, which is the best treatment for advanced ischemic heart disease. The sequential grafting technique in CABG was introduced by Flemma et al. in the 1970s. Since then, different methods of anastomosis such as individual or sequential grafts have been used. However, the efficacy of these methods is controversial.
Our meta-analysis was undertaken to analyze the efficacy of individual and sequential grafts used in patients with ischemic heart disease and under CABG.
Using the keywords "coronary artery bypass grafting", "individual graft", "sequential graft", and "ischemic heart disease", we searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Excerpta Medica database (EMBASE), and ClinicalTrials.gov databases and got data from inception to February 25, 2018. The search was restricted to studies with humans and had no restrictions in language. In addition, references from randomized trials and relevant reviews that were not identified in the database search were hand-searched.
The following inclusion criteria were applied: (1) patients with ischemic heart disease and under CABG; (2) cohort trials that compared the efficacy of individual and sequential coronary artery bypass; and (3) clinical outcomes reported, such as patency rate, blood flow, and the incidence of death. Reviews, meta-analyses, and observational studies were excluded. The meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines.
Two investigators independently extracted data from the relevant sources. Authors were contacted when data were incomplete or unclear and conflicts were resolved by discussion. Baseline demographic and quality characteristics (sample size, age, sex, community, and follow-up) of patients were collected from the eligible studies. The patency rate of graft and anastomosis, blood flow, and mortality were recorded. Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of included literatures based on recommendations from a non-randomized methodological level.
Binary classification variables of the clinical endpoints were measured using the risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The continuous variables of the clinical endpoints were determined by standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% CIs. Two-sided P-values<0.05 were considered statistically significant. Heterogeneity was assessed by the Cochran Q test and I2 statistic, and Cochran's P<0.10 and I2>50 were considered indicative of significant heterogeneity. Pooled analyses were conducted using a fixed effect model, whereas a random effect model was used if there was significant heterogeneity. Publication biases were assessed by funnel plot analysis and Egger's test. Data analysis was conducted using the RevMan 5.3 software (Nordic Cochrane Centre, Cochrane Collaboration, 2013), and sensitivity analysis was performed by the Stata 11.0 software (StataCorp, College Station, Texas, USA).
Data Search Results
We identified nine trials[6-14] out of 632 records that satisfied our inclusion criteria, as shown in the selection procedure depicted in Figure 1. A total of 7100 patients and 3060 grafts under individual coronary artery bypass and 7380 grafts under sequential coronary artery bypass were included. Baseline characteristics and quality assessment according to NOS is presented in Table 1. All clinical trials included in our study were middle to high quality cohort studies, with seven to nine NOS scores.
|References||Community||Comparability||Assessment method||Follow-up time||Quality assessment (NOS)|
|Age||Male (%)||Other factors||Rate (%)||Selection||Comparability||Outcome||Total|
|Takazawa et al., 2015||Saitama International Medical Center in Japan||71±8||63.4||_||Angiography||14.7±17.5||_||4||1||2||7|
|Fukui et al., 2012||Sakakibara Heart Institute, Tokyo, Japan||67.2±10.4/67.0±10.7||76.5/85.2||Body surface area||Angiography||12.1(221)||50.9||4||2||1||7|
|Samano et al., 2017||Orebro University Hospital, rebro, Sweden.||75.6±8.5||74.6/81||Body mass index, hypertension||Angiography||72||93.8||4||2||3||9|
|Ji et al., 2017||Zhongshan Hospital Fudan University, China||63.6±8.5/62.9±9.4||87.5/90||Smoking history, diabetes mellitus||Computed tomographic angiography||27.0±7.3||_||4||2||2||9|
|Gao et al., 2010||Patients operated on by a single surgeon||63.6±10.3||89||_||Angiography||26.4±23.6||_||4||2||1||7|
|Kim et al., 2011||Asan Medical Center||63.7±8.3/62.9±8.3||69.6/69||Hypertension, diabetes mellitus||Dual-source CT||14.8||_||4||2||2||8|
|Farsak et al., 2003||_||55.2±9.3||87||Atherosclerotic risk factors||Angiography||55.4±17.6||_||3||2||2||7|
|Vural et al., 2001||Yuksek Ihtisas Hospital in Turkey||49±8||89||Atherosclerotic risk factors||Angiography||69.6||_||4||2||2||8|
|Christenson et al., 1998||_||58.2±9.2||81||Hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes||Angiography||76||99.10%||3||2||3||8|
Seven clinical studies reported the results of graft patency. The analysis of the graft patency rate includes 2374 out of 2739 grafts from the individual coronary artery bypass group and 6803 out of 7210 from the sequential coronary artery bypass group. There are no significant differences between these groups (RR=0.96; 95% CI=0.91-1.02; P=0.16; I 2=87%) on the patency of grafts, as shown in Figure 2.
There were six clinical studies showing the results of anastomosis patency. The analysis of anastomosis patency includes 1100 out of 1400 anastomosis from the individual coronary artery bypass group and 1875 out of 2214 from the sequential coronary artery bypass group. There are no significant differences between these groups (RR=0.95; 95% CI=0.91-1.00; P=0.05; I 2=70%) in the patency of anastomosis (Figure 3).
Occluded Rate in Left Anterior Descending (LAD) System
Three clinical studies reported the occluded rate in LAD system. The analysis found the occluded rate in LAD system in 145 out of 235 LAD system anastomoses from the individual coronary artery bypass group and 213 out of 349 from the sequential coronary artery bypass group. There are no significant differences between these groups (RR=1.03; 95% CI=0.92-1.16; P=0.58; I 2=37%) in the occluded rate in LAD system, as demonstrated in Figure 4.
Occluded Rate in Right Coronary Artery (RCA) System
The occluded rate in RCA system was reported in three clinical studies. The analysis found the occluded rate in RCA system in 185 out of 403 RCA system anastomoses from the individual coronary artery bypass group and 122 out of 327 from the sequential coronary artery bypass group. There are no significant differences between these groups (RR=1.36; 95% CI=0.72-2.57; P=0.35; I2=95%) in the occluded rate in RCA system, as shown in Figure 5.
There were three clinical studies reporting the in-hospital mortality rates. The analysis of n of hospital mortality shows 16 of 664 patients from the individual coronary artery bypass group and 71 of 3765 from the sequential coronary artery bypass group. However, there are no significant differences between these groups (RR=1.57; 95% CI=0.92-2.69; P=0.10; I 2=0%) in the in-hospital mortality rates (Figure 6).
There were two clinical studies reporting the follow-up mortality rates. The analysis of n of hospital mortality shows eight out of 290 patients from the individual coronary artery bypass group and eight out of 275 patients from the sequential coronary artery bypass group. There are no significant differences between these groups (RR=0.96; 95% CI=0.36-2.53; P=0.93; I 2=0%) in the follow-up mortality rates (Figure 7).
Sensitivity and Publication Bias Analyses
Sensitivity analysis was conducted by excluding each individual study. It was found that the study of Christenson, in 1998, resulted in a significantly different result, as shown in Figure 8. A similar meta-analysis outcome was obtained, which demonstrated that our conclusion is stable, and this heterogeneity is not affected by the combined results. No significant evidence of publication bias was obtained using the Begg's test in the study endpoints, as shown in Table 2.
CABG has become the gold standard for the treatment of coronary artery disease involving multiple vessels, and it consists of on-pump CABG and off-pump CABG. In the early 1980s, two surgeons published their extensive series of off-pump CABG in patients who received grafts in the LAD and the main RCA, but with more limited and difficult grafting of coronary arteries on the posterior and lateral walls[15,16]. On-pump CABG provides a motionless operative field, but it can be associated with a number of complications, such as myocardial ischemic injury, strokes, coagulation, and inflammatory responses[17,18]. To the present, it has been reported that the advantage of sequential coronary artery bypass technology is that it can save grafts, reduce proximal anastomosis, shorten the operation time, provide a more complete vascularization, and have a satisfactory long-term patency rate[19,20]. It is more accurate to determine the direction and length of the bridge between anastomoses. There is a study showing that the proximal obstruction of the sequential bridge leads to the reduction of blood flow in multiple coronary arteries, resulting in a large area of myocardial infarction, and endangers the patient's life. It is also considered that the distal end of the proximal end of the sequential bridge plays an important role in collateral circulation, and patients rarely have myocardial infarction[22,23]. In addition, some professors and their teams have found out that a sequential bridge can reduce the blood flow resistance of bridges, which reduces the mismatch of vascular resistance and increases the long-term patency rate.
The coronary circulation can be divided into left-dominant, right-dominant, and co-dominant systems. In a left-dominant system, the posterior descending artery (PDA) is supplied by the circumflex artery. In a right-dominant system, the PDA is supplied by the RCA. In this meta-analysis, we included nine trials with a total of 7100 patients and 1440 grafts under individual or sequential coronary artery bypass. We found out that the individual and sequential coronary artery bypass associated show no significant differences in the graft patency, anastomosis patency, occluded rate in LAD system, occluded rate in RCA system, in-hospital mortality, and follow-up mortality. In a previous study, the patency of sequential coronary artery bypass was lower than of individual coronary artery bypass. In a meta-analysis of RCTs on almost 16,900 patients, it was found no difference in 30-day mortality. Kowalewski et al. found out that 19,000 patients demonstrated no significant difference in short-term mortality. Another investigation in a recent meta-analysis of RCTs indicated no difference in patients with over a six-months follow-up (RR, 1.02; 95% CI: 0.86-1.22; P=0.81)[27,28]. In the present study, we included the newest clinical trials and compared the individual and sequential coronary artery bypass groups regarding grafts and anastomosis. Also, we performed sensitivity and publication bias analyses, which demonstrates that our analysis is stable and has no publish bias.
Nevertheless, there are some limitations in this meta-analysis. Firstly, the graft used in coronary artery bypass is not unified. Saphenous vein grafts and internal thoracic artery are both included in this study, which might have affected the reliability of the results. Secondly, several of the included clinical trials are cohort studies, instead of randomized clinical trials, which reduces the level of evidence. In addition, the generally different designs and characteristics of each trial might have also caused heterogeneity. Therefore, more rigorous, large-sample, international trials are needed to further confirm the results.
In conclusion, no significant difference on clinical data were observed regarding anastomosis patency, occluded rate in LAD system, occluded rate in RCA system, in-hospital mortality, and follow-up mortality. The patency of individual and the patency of sequential coronary artery bypass are similar to each other.
1. The top 10 causes of death . World Health Statistics:Geneva; 24 May 2018 . Available from:
2. Harskamp RE, Alexander JH, Ferguson TB Jr, Hager R, Mack MJ, EnglumB, et al. Frequency and Predictors of Internal Mammary Artery Graft Failure andSubsequent Clinical Outcomes: Insights From the Project of Ex-vivo Vein GraftEngineering via Transfection (PREVENT) IV Trial. Circulation. 2016;133(2):131-8.doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.015549.
3. Flemma RJ, Johnson WD, Lepley D Jr. Triple aorto-coronary veinbypass as treatment for coronary insufficiency. Arch Surg.1971;103(1):82-3.
4. Walther S, Schuetz GM, Hamm B, Dewey M. . Rofo. 2011 Dec;183(12):1106-10.doi:10.1055/s-0031-1281809. German.
5. Wells GA, Shea B, O'Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M, et al.The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS)for assessing the quality of nonrandomisedstudies in meta-analyses . Ottawa (CA): Ottawa Hospital ResearchInstitute; c2019 . Available from:
6. Christenson JT, Simonet F, Schmuziger M. Sequential vein bypassgrafting: tactics and long-term results. Cardiovasc Surg. 1998;6(4):389-97.doi:10.1016/S0967-2109(98)00024-6.
7. Farsak B, Tokmakoglu H, Kandemir O, Günaydin S, Aydin H,Yorgancioglu C, et al. Angiographic assessment of sequential and individualcoronary artery bypass grafting. J Card Surg. 2003;18(6):524-9; discussion30-31. doi:10.1046/j.0886-0440.2003.02063.x.
8. Fukui T, Tabata M, Morita S, Takanashi S. Sequential free rightinternal thoracic artery grafting for multivessel coronary artery bypassgrafting. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012;144(4):824-9.doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2011.11.021.
9. Gao C, Wang M, Wang G, Xiao C, Wu Y, Li B, et al. Patency ofsequential and individual saphenous vein grafts after off-pump coronary arterybypass grafting. J Card Surg. 2010;25(6):633-7.doi:10.1111/j.1540-8191.2010.01145.x.
10. Ji Q, Shi Y, Xia L, Ma R, Shen J, Lai H, et al. Revascularization ofLeft Coronary System Using a Skeletonized Left Internal Mammary Artery -Sequential vs. Separate Grafting. Circ J. 2017;82(1):102-9.doi:10.1253/circj.CJ-17-0223. [MedLine]
11. Kim HJ, Lee TY, Kim JB, Cho WC, Jung SH, Chung CH, et al. The impactof sequential versus single anastomoses on flow characteristics and mid-termpatency of saphenous vein grafts in coronary bypass grafting. J ThoracCardiovasc Surg. 2011 Mar;141(3):750-4.doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2010.05.037.
12. Samano N, Geijer H, Bodin L, Arbeus M, Mannion JD, Dashwood M, etal. The no-touch saphenous vein graft in elderly coronary bypass patients withmultiple comorbidities is a promising conduit to substitute the left internalthoracic artery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017 Aug;154(2):457-466.e3.doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2017.03.048. [MedLine]
13. Takazawa A, Nakajima H, Iguchi A, Tabata M, Morita K, Koike H, etal. Impacts of intraoperative flow on graft patency of sequential and individualsaphenous vein grafts. Innovations (Phila). 2015;10(2):85-9.doi:10.1097/IMI.0000000000000140.
14. Vural KM, Sener E, Tasdemir O. Long-term patency of sequential andindividual saphenous vein coronary bypass grafts. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg.2001;19(2):140-4. doi:10.1016/S1010-7940(00)00629-1.
15. Buffolo E, Andrade JC, Succi J, Leão LE, Gallucci C. Directmyocardial revascularization without cardiopulmonary bypass. Thorac CardiovascSurg. 1985;33(1):26-9. doi:10.1055/s-2007-1014076.
16. Gaudino M, Angelini GD, Antoniades C, Bakaeen F, Benedetto U,Calafiore AM, et al. Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: 30 Years ofDebate. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018 Aug 21;7(16):e009934.doi:10.1161/JAHA.118.009934. [MedLine]
17. King N. Is there a long-term survival benefit with on pump coronaryartery bypass grafting? Ann Transl Med. 2017;5(24):498.doi:10.21037/atm.2017.10.10.
18. Puskas JD, Williams WH, O'Donnell R, Patterson RE, Sigman SR, SmithAS, et al. Off-pump and on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting are associatedwith similar graft patency, myocardial ischemia, and freedom fromreintervention: long-term follow-up of a randomized trial. Ann Thorac Surg.2011;91(6):1836-42; discussion 1842-3.doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2010.12.043.
19. Al-Ruzzeh S, George S, Bustami M, Nakamura K, Khan S, Yacoub M, etal. The early clinical and angiographic outcome of sequential coronary arterybypass grafting with the off-pump technique. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg.2002;123(3):525-30. doi:10.1067/mtc.2002.119059.
20. McNamara JJ, Bjerke HS, Chung GK, Dang CR. Blood flow in sequentialvein grafts. Circulation. 1979;60(2 Pt 2):33-8.
21. Kieser TM, FitzGibbon GM, Keon WJ. Sequential coronary bypassgrafts. Long-term follow-up. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg.1986;91(5):767-72.
22. Christenson JT, Schmuziger M. Sequential Venous Bypass Grafts:Results 10 Years Later. Ann Thorac Surg. 1997;63(2):371-6.doi:10.1016/S0003-4975(96)01059-4.
23. Meeter K, Veldkamp R, Tijssen JG, van Herwerden LL, Bos E. Clinicaloutcome of single versus sequential grafts in coronary bypass operations at tenyears' follow-up. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg.1991;101(6):1076-81.
24. Dong L, Kang YK, An XG. Short-Term and Mid-Term Clinical OutcomesFollowing Hybrid Coronary Revascularization Versus Off-Pump Coronary ArteryBypass: A Meta-Analysis. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2018;110(4):321-30.doi:10.5935/abc.20180044. English, Portuguese. [MedLine]
25. Fattouch K, Guccione F, Dioguardi P, Sampognaro R, Corrado E, CarusoM, et al. Off-pump versus on-pump myocardial revascularization in patients withST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a randomized trial. J ThoracCardiovasc Surg. 2009;137(3):650-6; discussion 656-7.doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2008.11.033.
26. Deppe AC, Arbash W, Kuhn EW, Slottosch I, Scherner M, LiakopoulosOJ, et al. Current evidence of coronary artery bypass grafting off-pump versuson-pump: a systematic review with meta-analysis of over 16,900 patientsinvestigated in randomized controlled trials†. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg.2016;49(4):1031-41; discussion 1041. doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezv268.
27. Sá MP, Ferraz PE, Escobar RR, Oliveira Nunes E, Lustosa P,Vasconcelos FP, et al. Patency of skeletonized versus pedicled internal thoracicartery in coronary bypass graft surgery: a systematic review, metaanalysis andmeta-regression. Int J Surg. 2014;12(7):666-72.doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.05.071.
28. Luo T, Ni Y. Short-term and Long-term Postoperative Safety ofOff-Pump versus On-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Coronary HeartDisease: A Meta-analysis for Randomized Controlled Trials. Thorac CardiovascSurg 2015;63(4):319-27. doi:10.1055/s-0035-1544232.
No financial support.
No conflict of interest.
Authors’ roles & responsibilities
ZL Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; final approval of the version to be published
LL Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; final approval of the version to be published
Article receive on Friday, September 14, 2018
Article accepted on Thursday, January 31, 2019