Features and hospital outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with calcification of target coronary arteries

Aim. To compare strategy and early results of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with and without calcification of target coronary arteries (TCA).

Material and methods. The prospective study analyzed the data of patients (n=462) who underwent elective isolated CABG in 2017-2018 using cardiopulmonary bypass and microsurgery. Two groups were distinguished: group 1 — patients with TCA calcification (n=108), group 2 — patients without TCA calcification (n=354). In cases where the distal coronary artery lesion did not allow standard bypass grafting, additional complex anastomoses were provided. A comparison of intraoperative parameters and early results of CABG was carried out.

Results. In groups 1 and 2, the revascularization index did not differ significantly and was 4,5 and 4,3, respectively. The frequency of complex surgical interventions in group 1 was higher: for example, ‘Y’ grafts were used in groups 1 and 2, respectively, in 32% (35/108) and 12% (44/354), p<0,05; sequential anastomoses in 14% (15/108) and 7% (26/354), p<0,05; prolonged patch-angioplasty — in 21% (23/108) and 5% (16/354), p<0,05; anastomoses with arteries <1,5 mm in diameter — in 33% (36/108) and 4% (14/354), p<0,05; coronary endarterectomy in 17% (18/108) and 5% (16/354), p<0,05, respectively. The duration of cardiopulmonary bypass was longer in group 1. At the same time, the hospital clinical results did not differ significantly: mortality was not registered; the frequency of perioperative myocardial infarction was 1,8% (group 1) and 1,1% (group 2); the need for inotropes, frequency of arrhythmia, length of stay in the intensive care unit and hospital were similar; there were no cases of in-hospital angina recurrence.

Conclusion. CABG in patients with calcification of TCA is associated with surgical challenges and need for complex adjunct techniques. Nevertheless, complete surgical revascularization is real in these cases, and the hospital results are comparable to those in patients without calcification.

1. McClelland RL, Jorgensen NW, Budoff M, et al. 10-Year Coronary Heart Disease Risk Prediction Using Coronary Artery Calcium and Traditional Risk Factors: Derivation in the MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) With Validation in the HNR (Heinz Nixdorf Recall) Study and the DHS (Dallas Heart Study). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66(15):1643-53. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2015.08.035.

2. Wang F, Rozanski A, Dey D, et al. Age- and gender-adjusted percentiles for number of calcified plaques in coronary artery calcium scanning. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2018.S1934-5925(18)30308-3. doi:10.1016/j.jcct.2018.12.001.

3. Copeland-Halperin RS, Baber U, Aquino M, et al. Prevalence, correlates, and impact of coronary calcification on adverse events following PCI with newer-generation DES: Findings from a large multiethnic registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;91(5):859-66. doi:10.1002/ccd.27204.

4. Ertelt K, Généreux P, Mintz GS, et al. Impact of the severity of coronary artery calcification on clinical events in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (from the Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy Trial). Am J Cardiol. 2013;112(11):1730-7. doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2013.07.038.

5. Serruys PW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(10):961-72. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0804626.

6. Farkouh ME, Domanski M, Sleeper LA, et al. Strategies for multivessel revascularization in patients with diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(25):2375-84. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1211585.

7. Bourantas CV, Zhang YJ, Garg S, et al. Prognostic Implications of Severe Coronary Calcification in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery: An Analysis of the SYNTAX Study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;85(2):199-206. doi:10.1002/ccd.25545.

8. Head SJ, Mack MJ, Holmes DR Jr, et al. Incidence, predictors and outcomes of incomplete revascularization after percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting: a subgroup analysis of 3-year SYNTAX data. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2012;41(3):535-41. doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezr105.

9. Ayoub C, Erthal F, Abdelsalam MA, et al. Prognostic value of segment involvement score compared to other measures of coronary atherosclerosis by computed tomography: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2017;11(4):258-67. doi:10.1016/j.jcct.2017.05.001.

10. Austen WG, Edwards JE, Frye RL, et al. A reporting system on patients evaluated for coronary artery disease. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee for Grading of Coronary Artery Disease, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery, American Heart Association. Circulation. 1975;51(4 Suppl):5-40. doi:10.1161/01.CIR.51.4.5.

11. Qian Z, Anderson H, Marvasty I, et al. Lesion- and vessel-specific coronary artery calcium scores are superior to whole-heart Agatston and volume scores in the diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2010;4(6):391-9. doi:10.1016/j.jcct.2010.09.001.

12. Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. European Heart Journal. 2019;40(2):87-165. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ ehy394.

13. Thygesen K, Alpert JS, Jaffe AS, et al. Executive Group on behalf of the Joint European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA)/World Heart Federation (WHF) Task Force for the Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction. Fourth Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction (2018). Circulation. 2018;138(20):618-51. doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000000617.