Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 8, 2026

Surgical Swine Model of Chronic Cardiac Ischemia Treated by Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery
Published on: March 27, 2018
Current Readings: Single vs Bilateral Internal Mammary Artery in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting
Julius I Ejiofor1, Tsuyoshi Kaneko1, Sary F Aranki1
1Division of Cardiac Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Insights
Bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) grafting shows potential for better long-term survival, but risks like sternal infection and longer surgery times need consideration. Further data is needed to confirm its effectiveness.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Surgery
- Thoracic Surgery
- Surgical Outcomes
Background:
- Retrospective studies suggest bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) grafting improves long-term survival compared to single left internal mammary artery (LIMA) grafting.
- The Arterial Revascularization Trial's interim results have not yet confirmed this survival advantage.
- Widespread adoption of BIMA grafting faces challenges, including a higher risk of deep sternal wound infection.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the effectiveness and risks associated with bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) grafting in coronary artery bypass surgery.
- To compare long-term survival outcomes between BIMA and LIMA grafting.
- To identify strategies for mitigating complications associated with BIMA grafting.
Main Methods:
- Review of retrospective data and interim results from the Arterial Revascularization Trial.
- Analysis of surgical techniques, including skeletonized harvesting and Y-graft configuration for BIMA.
- Assessment of operative time, in-hospital costs, and sternal wound infection rates.
Main Results:
- Retrospective data indicates superior long-term survival with BIMA grafting.
- Interim results from the Arterial Revascularization Trial have not corroborated the survival benefit.
- Skeletonized harvesting and Y-graft utilization may reduce infection risk and improve revascularization, respectively.
- BIMA grafting is associated with increased operative time (approx. 25 minutes) and higher costs.
Conclusions:
- The definitive long-term effectiveness of BIMA grafting remains uncertain pending final results of the Arterial Revascularization Trial.
- Strategies to minimize sternal wound infection, such as skeletonized harvesting, are crucial for BIMA adoption.
- Balancing the potential survival benefits against increased operative time, costs, and infection risks is essential.
Abstract:
There is strong retrospective data demonstrating that bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) grafting leads to better long-term survival as compared to left internal mammary artery grafting. However, this survival advantage was not corroborated by the interim results of the Arterial Revascularization Trial. Today, there are barriers to widespread adoption of BIMA grafting. One of the main disadvantages of the use of BIMA grafts is the higher risk of deep sternal wound infection. Deep sternal wound infections can be minimized by skeletonized harvesting of the internal mammary artery grafts, which preserve blood flow to the sternum. Also, utilizing the BIMA graft as a "Y" graft may lead to more complete revascularization compared to its in situ use. BIMA grafting on average takes 25 minutes longer operating time with a higher in-hospital costs. We eagerly await the 10-year results of the Arterial Revascularization Trial to determine the truly unbiased randomized long-term effectiveness of BIMA grafting.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Coronary Artery Disease I: Introduction
Coronary Artery Disease II: Pathophysiology
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Coronary Artery Disease III: Clinical Manifestations
Coronary Artery Disease IV: Preventive Measures
Arteries of Lower Limbs

