Endoscopic versus open radial artery harvesting for coronary artery bypass grafting

Jose L Navia1, Nicolas Brozzi, Jorge Chiu

  • 1Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA. naviaj@ccf.org

Insights

Endoscopic radial artery harvesting for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) resulted in better wound healing and less pain compared to open harvesting. Both methods showed infrequent complications like infection and neurologic deficits.

Area of Science:

  • Cardiovascular Surgery
  • Minimally Invasive Techniques
  • Vascular Grafting

Background:

  • Radial artery is a preferred conduit for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) after internal thoracic arteries.
  • Comparison of endoscopic versus open radial artery harvesting techniques is crucial for optimizing patient outcomes.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare wound healing and arm complications between endoscopic and open radial artery harvesting in CABG patients.
  • To evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic radial artery harvesting.

Main Methods:

  • A retrospective study of 509 patients undergoing CABG with radial artery conduit from January 2002 to July 2004.
  • Propensity score matching was used to compare 39 endoscopic harvesting patients with 117 open harvesting patients.
  • Outcomes assessed included wound healing, neurologic deficits, wound infection, and pain scores.

Main Results:

  • Endoscopic harvesting showed significantly better wound healing (p = 0.01) and appearance (p = 0.004).
  • Patients undergoing endoscopic harvesting reported lower pain scores (p = 0.006).
  • Neurologic deficits and wound infections were infrequent in both groups, with more severe infections noted in the open harvesting group.

Conclusions:

  • Endoscopic radial artery harvesting offers superior wound appearance and reduced pain post-CABG.
  • Both endoscopic and open harvesting methods are associated with low rates of complications, including neurologic deficits and wound infections.
Abstract