2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2016.08.060
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Right internal thoracic artery or radial artery? A propensity-matched comparison on the second-best arterial conduit

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…4 However, it has also been shown that the RITA is superior to the RA in clinical outcomes. [5][6][7] It is also agreeable that the left internal thoracic artery (LITA) and RITA are identical arteries, with the same biological qualities. Raja and colleagues reported that using the RITA instead of LITA to bypass the left anterior descending artery has not increased the long-term risk for late death or repeat revascularization.…”
mentioning
confidence: 96%
“…4 However, it has also been shown that the RITA is superior to the RA in clinical outcomes. [5][6][7] It is also agreeable that the left internal thoracic artery (LITA) and RITA are identical arteries, with the same biological qualities. Raja and colleagues reported that using the RITA instead of LITA to bypass the left anterior descending artery has not increased the long-term risk for late death or repeat revascularization.…”
mentioning
confidence: 96%
“…A meta-analysis of propensity-matched studies (PMS) (12) showed that the operative mortality was not different between the RA and RITA [odds ratio (OR) 1.53, P=0.07], but demonstrated a statistically significant 25% risk reduction of late death and a lower risk of repeat revascularization for the RITA when compared to the RA (HR 0.75, P=0.028 and 0.37, P=0.03 respectively). In a subsequent PMS study (13) comparing the RITA and RA as second arterial conduits in CABG, Benedetto and colleagues demonstrated a comparable mortality between the two groups during the first 4 years of follow-up (HR 1.00, P=0.98). However, after 4 years the RITA was associated with a significant reduction in late mortality compared to RA (HR 0.67, P=0.02).…”
mentioning
confidence: 97%
“…They previously reported results on the same cohort in a matched comparison between the RITA and the radial artery for the second-best arterial conduit. 4 They concluded that in low-risk patients, the use of the RITA as a second arterial conduit instead of the radial artery improved survival when used to graft the left but not the right coronary system. With this background, the authors performed this second investigation for another dilemma surgeons encounter daily: Is there any benefit in grafting the RCA with the RITA or should we keep doing the same thing over and over again?…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%