PLoS ONE (Jan 2020)

Radial artery harvesting in coronary artery bypass grafting surgery-Endoscopic or open method? A meta-analysis.

  • Tzu-Yen Huang,
  • Ting-Shuo Huang,
  • Yu-Ting Cheng,
  • Yao-Chang Wang,
  • Tzu-Ping Chen,
  • Shun-Ying Yin,
  • Chi-Hsiao Yeh

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236499
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 15, no. 7
p. e0236499

Abstract

Read online

We analyzed the clinical outcomes of open radial artery harvesting (OAH) and endoscopic radial artery harvesting (EAH) undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). We designed this meta-analysis conducted using Pubmed, Medline, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE. Articles with comparisons of OAH and EAH undergoing CABG were included. Primary outcomes included the wound infection rate, the wound complication rate, neurological complications of the forearm, in-hospital mortality, long-term survival, and the patency rate. The results of our study included six randomized controlled trials (RCTs), two non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs) with matching, and 10 NRCTs. In total, 2919 patients were included in 18 studies, while 1187 (40.7%) and 1732 (59.3%) patients received EAH and OAH, respectively. EAH was associated with a lower incidence of wound infection (RR = 0.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.14 to 0.60, p = 0.03), and neurological complications over the harvesting site (RR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.27 to 0.62, p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality, long-term survival (over one year), and the graft patency rate. According to our analysis, endoscopic radial artery harvesting can improve the outcome of the harvesting site, without affecting the mortality, long-term survival, and graft patency.