Saphenous vein harvesting techniques for coronary artery bypass grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Issue 2 (March 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Vuong, Nguyen Lam; Elfaituri, Muhammed Khaled; Eldoadoa, Mohammed; Karimzadeh, Sedighe; Mokhtar, Mohamed Ashraf; Eid, Peter Samuel; Nam, Nguyen Hai; Mostafa, Mostafa Reda; Radwan, Ibrahim; Zaki, Marwa Mostafa Mohamed; Al Khudari, Rawan; Kassem, Mahmoud; Huy, Nguyen Tien
• Is Part Of: Coronary artery disease. Volume 33:Issue 2(2022)
• Publication Date: 2022-03
• Subjects: coronary artery bypass graft -- great saphenous vein -- harvest -- meta-analysis -- systematic review; Coronary heart disease -- Periodicals; Coronary Disease -- Indexes; Coronary Disease -- Periodicals; 616.123005
• DOI: 10.1097/MCA.0000000000001048
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0954-6928

Abstract

Abstract : The great saphenous vein (GSV) graft remains a frequently used conduit for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. The optimal technique for GSV harvesting has been the subject of on-going controversy. We therefore sought to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of all available GSV harvesting techniques in CABG. A systematic search of 12 electronic databases was performed to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of any GSV harvesting technique, including conventional vein harvesting (CVH), no-touch, standard bridging technique (SBT) and endoscopic vein harvesting (EVH) techniques. We investigated safety and long-term efficacy outcomes. All outcomes were analyzed using the frequentist network meta-analysis. A total of 6480 patients from 34 RCTs were included. For safety outcomes, EVH reduced 91% and 77% risk of wound infection compared to no-touch and CVH, respectively. EVH and SBT also significantly reduced the risk of sensibility disorder and postoperative pain. The techniques were not significantly different regarding long-term efficacy outcomes, including mortality, myocardial infarction and graft patency. For GSV harvesting for CABG, EVH techniques are the most favorable, but in case of using an open technique, no-touch is more recommended than CVH. More effective and safer procedures should be investigated for GSV harvesting in CABG. Abstract : Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.