Shortterm and long-term results of bimammary bypass surgery in patients with multivessel coronary disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus after propensity score matching

Background. Among patients who have undergone coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG), the proportion of people with diabetes mellitus (DM) is about 40 %. To date, the problem of choosing the optimal method of surgical myocardial revascularization, which can provide the best result in this cohort, remains completely unresolved.

The aim of the study. To assess the in-hospital and long-term results of bimammary and traditional bypass surgery in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Methods. From September 2018 to December 2021, 176 CABG surgeries were performed in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and type 2 diabetes at the Federal Center for Cardiovascular Surgery (Krasnoyarsk). Group 1 (n = 45) included patients who underwent myocardial revascularization using two mammary arteries; group 2 (n = 131) included patients who underwent myocardial revascularization using traditional technique. After propensity score matching, 45 patients were selected into each group, comparable by basic preoperative characteristics.

Results. In group  1, cardiopulmonary bypass surgeries were performed in 23 (51.1 %) patients (group 1CPB), off-pump surgeries – in 22 (58.2 %) (group 1OP); in group  2, all patients underwent cardiopulmonary bypass surgeries. Hospital mortality was recorded in group 2 in 1 (2.2 %) case. Deep sternal infection developed in 1 (4.5 %) patient in group 1OP. Long-term survival in group 2 was 85.3 %, in group 1CPB – 83.3 % (p = 0.689), in group 1OP – 84.2 % (p = 0.739). 84.2 % of patients in group 2 and 100 % in groups 1CPB and 1OP had no cardiovascular events (p = 0.144 and p = 0.145, respectively).

Conclusion. Bimammary bypass surgery in patients with type 2 diabetes is a safe and effective method of surgical treatment of coronary artery disease in both shortand long-term period and may be the operation of choice in patients with multivessel disease. There were no differences in patient survival up to 45 months; bimammary revascularization was associated with 100 % absence of cardiac mortality.

1. Virani SS, Alonso A, Aparicio HJ, Benjamin EJ, Bittencourt MS, Callaway CW, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics – 2021 update: A report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2021; 143(8): e254-e743. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000950

2. Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, Alfonso F, Banning AP, Benedetto U, et al. ESC Scientific Document Group. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2019; 40(2): 87-165. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy394

3. D’Agostino RS, Jacobs JP, Badhwar V, Fernandez FG, Paone G, Wormuth DW, et al. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery database: 2018 update on outcomes and quality. Ann Thorac Surg. 2018; 105(1): 15-23. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2017.10.035

4. Muradov AG, Drobot DB, Grinshteyn YuI, Sakovich VA, Andin AV. Immediate results of complete conventional and bimammary bypass grafting in patients with multivessel coronary disease. Creative Cardiology. 2022; 16(3): 355-369. (In Russ.). doi: 10.24022/1997-3187-2022-16- 3-355-369

5. Rocha RV, Tam DY, Karkhanis R, Wang X, Austin PC, Ko DT, et al. Long-term outcomes associated with total arterial revascularization vs non-total arterial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2020; 5(5): 507-514. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2019.6104

6. Bezdenezhnykh NA, Sumin AN, Barbarash OL. Patients with diabetes and myocardial revascularization from evidence-based medicine positions: Cardiologist’s opinion. Part 1. Russian Journal of Cardiology. 2017; 4(144): 105-113. (In Russ.). doi: 10.15829/1560-4071-2017-4-105-113

7. Raza S, Sabik JF 3rd, Ainkaran P, Blackstone EH. Coronary artery bypass grafting in diabetics: A growing health care cost crisis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015; 150(2): 304-302.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2015.03.041

8. Benedetto U, Altman DG, Gerry S, Gray A, Lees B, Pawlaczyk R, et al. Arterial revascularization trial Investigators. Pedicled and skeletonized single and bilateral internal thoracic artery grafts and the incidence of sternal wound complications: Insights from the arterial revascularization trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016; 152: 270-276. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2016.03.056

9. LaPar DJ, Crosby IK, Rich JB, Quader MA, Speir AM, Kern JA, et al. Bilateral internal mammary artery use for coronary artery bypass grafting remains underutilized: A propensity-matched multi-institution analysis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015; 100(1): 8-14; discussion 14-15. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2015.02.088

10. Hirotani T, Kameda T, Kumamoto T, Shirota S, Yamano M. Effects of coronary artery bypass grafting using internal mammary arteries for diabetic patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999; 34(2): 532-538. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(99)00215-6

11. Lazar HL. The risk of mediastinitis and deep sternal wound infections with single and bilateral, pedicled and skeletonized internal thoracic arteries. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2018; 7(5): 663-672. doi: 10.21037/acs.2018.06.11

12. Taggart DP, Altman DG, Gray AM, Lees B, Gerry S, Benedetto U, et al. Randomized trial of bilateral versus single internalthoracic-artery grafts. N Engl J Med. 2016; 375(26): 2540-2549. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1610021

13. Di Bacco L, Repossini A, Muneretto C, Torkan L, Bisleri G. Long-term outcome of total arterial myocardial revascularization versus conventional coronary artery bypass in diabetic and nondiabetic patients: A propensity-match analysis. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2020; 21(5): 580-587. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2019.09.018

14. Calafiore AM, Di Mauro M, Di Giammarco G, Teodori G, Iacò AL, Mazzei V, et al. Single versus bilateral internal mammary artery for isolated first myocardial revascularization in multivessel disease: long-term clinical results in medically treated diabetic patients. Ann Thorac Surg. 2005; 80(3): 888-895. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2005.03.077

15. Pevni D, Medalion B, Mohr R, Ben-Gal Y, Laub A, Nevo A, et al. Should bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting be used in patients with diabetes mellitus? Ann Thorac Surg. 2017; 103(2): 551-558. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.06.044

16. Gansera B, Delalic A, Eszlari E, Eichinger W. 14-year results of bilateral versus single internal thoracic artery grafts for left-sided myocardial revascularization in young diabetic patients. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017; 65(4): 272-277. doi: 10.1055/s-0036-1593864

17. Iribarne A, Westbrook BM, Malenka DJ, Schmoker JD, McCullough JN, Leavitt BJ, et al. Should diabetes be a contraindication to bilateral internal mammary artery grafting? Ann Thorac Surg. 2018; 105(3): 709-714. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2017.08.054

18. Matsuura K, Jin WW, Liu H, Matsumiya G. Computational fluid dynamics study of the endside and sequential coronary artery bypass anastomoses in a native coronary occlusion model. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2017; 26(4): 583-589. doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivx376

19. Glineur D, Boodhwani M, Hanet C, de Kerchove L, Navarra E, Astarci P, et al. Bilateral internal thoracic artery configuration for coronary artery bypass surgery: A prospective randomized trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016; 9(7): e003518. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.115.003518

20. Mehta RH, Ferguson TB, Lopes RD, Hafley GE, Mack MJ, Kouchoukos NT, et al. Saphenous vein grafts with multiple versus single distal targets in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery: one-year graft failure and five-year outcomes from the Project of Ex-Vivo Vein Graft Engineering via Transfection (PREVENT) IV Trial. Circulation. 2011; 124(3): 280-288. doi: 10.1161/circulationaha.110.99

21. Wang C, Li P, Zhang F, Kong Q, Li J. Does bilateral internal mammary artery grafting better suit patients with diabetes? Two different ways to explore outcomes. Circ J. 2020; 84(3): 436-444. doi: 10.1253/circj.CJ-19-1050

22. Taggart DP, Audisio K, Gerry S, Robinson NB, Rahouma M, Soletti GJ, et al. Single versus multiple arterial grafting in diabetic patients at 10 years: The Arterial Revascularization Trial. Eur HeartJ. 2022; 43(44): 4644-4652. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehac199