We retrospectively compared the results of conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) performed on patients who showed no preoperative evidence of serious atherosclerosis of the ascending aorta with the results of the aortic no-touch technique (using coronary artery–saphenous vein composite grafts) on CABG patients who did show such evidence.
From 2003 through 2012, 3,152 consecutive patients underwent isolated primary CABG at our hospital. We chose 360 for the current study. The study group (n=120) comprised patients who had undergone operation via the aortic no-touch technique. Propensity-score-matching (1:2) was used to select the control group of 240 patients who had undergone conventional CABG. Early and late survival rates, reintervention-free survival rates, and freedom from cardiac death were compared.
Early and late mortality rates were similar in the study and control groups (P=0.19 vs P=0.29, respectively), as were cardiac-related death (2.5% vs 2.1%, respectively; P=0.53) and overall death (8.3% vs 7.9%, respectively; P=0.51). Overall survival rates were 91.7% vs 92.1% and freedom-from-cardiac-death rates were 97.4% vs 97.5% (P=0.71 vs P=0.78, respectively; mean follow-up period, 5.27 ± 2.51 yr). Reintervention-free survival rates were also similar (96.7% vs 98.8%, respectively; P=0.2).
As a result of the similar rates of early and late survival, reintervention-free survival, and freedom from cardiac death, we conclude that the aortic no-touch technique with composite grafts might be a reasonable option in patients who have atherosclerotic ascending aorta that cannot be clamped.
