Search

Objective The aims of the study were to determine whether endoscopic harvesting of the radial artery (RA) reduces morbidity due to pain, infection, and disability with improvement in satisfaction and cosmesis compared to the conventional technique and (2) to compare the 6-month angiographic patency of the RA harvested conventionally and endoscopically. Methods In a prospective randomized study, 119 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting using the RA were randomized to have RA harvested either conventionally (n = 59) or endoscopically (n = 60). Results Radial artery harvest time (open wound time) was significantly reduced in the endoscopic group (36.5 ± 9.4 vs 57.7 ± 9.4 minutes, P < 0.001). Only one patient developed wound infection (1.6%) in the endoscopic group compared with six patients (10.2%), P = 0.061, in the conventional group. Although this was not statistically significant, clinically this was relevant in terms of reduction in postoperative morbidity. Postoperative pain in the arm incision was significantly lower in the endoscopic group at postoperative day 2 ( P < 0.001) and at discharge ( P < 0.001) and similar to the conventional open group at 6 weeks’ follow-up ( P = 0.103). Overall patient satisfaction and cosmesis were significantly better in the endoscopic group at postoperative day 2 ( P < 0.001), at discharge ( P < 0.001), and at 6 weeks’ follow-up ( P < 0.001). There was no difference in the arm disability postoperatively ( P = 0.505) between the two groups. Six-month angiographic assessment of 23 patients (12 endoscopic and 11 open) revealed no difference in the patency rate (10/12 in endoscopic and 9/11 in open group). Conclusions Endoscopic RA harvesting reduced the incidence of postoperative wound infection and wound pain and improved patient satisfaction and cosmesis compared with conventional harvesting technique. There was no difference in the 6-month angiographic patency of the RA harvested conventionally and endoscopically.

Objective From 2005 to 2007, 119 patients were enrolled in a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing open and endoscopically harvested radial arteries for coronary artery bypass grafting. The objective of the current study was to compare graft patency between intervention groups at more than 5 years from the initial trial. We hypothesized that endoscopically harvested radial arteries would show equivalent patency to those conventionally harvested. Methods At 5 years or greater from their operation, all consenting patients underwent a single-day anatomic and functional cardiac assessment with coronary computed tomography angiography and sestamibi myocardial perfusion scanning. Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Surveys and Seattle Angina Questionnaires were completed to assess the overall quality of life. All patients had received calcium channel blocker therapy for at least 6 months postoperatively. Results The mean (SD) duration of follow-up was 79.2 (8.6) months for all patients. One death occurred within 30 days of coronary artery bypass grafting in each treatment group, and eight additional noncardiac deaths occurred during the study time frame. Of 119 patients, 66 consented to follow-up. Thirty-two had open radial artery harvest, and 34 had endoscopic radial artery harvest. At more than 5 years, there were 28 patent conventionally harvested radial arteries (87.5%) and 31 patent endoscopically harvested radial arteries (91.2%) ( P = 0.705). Measured quality of life was comparable between groups. Conclusions Endoscopic radial artery harvest is safe and effective when compared with open radial artery harvest, with excellent graft patency demonstrated at more than 5 years. Patency results are noninferior in endoscopic radial artery harvest.