lock Open Access lock Peer-Reviewed




Bilateral internal thoracic artery and optimal revascularization strategy in insulin-dependent diabetic patients

Omar Asdrúbal Vilca Mejía; Luiz Augusto Ferreira Lisboa; Luís Alberto Oliveira Dallan; Fabio Biscegli Jatene

DOI: 10.5935/1678-9741.20150062

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a leading cause of mortality and morbidity in diabetic patients[1]. Four among 10 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) are diabetic in the United States [2]. Furthermore, insulin-dependent diabetics undergoing CABG reaches 20% in São Paulo Registry of Cardiovascular Surgery (REPLICCAR) [3].

Currently, there is a progressive increase in the prevalence of diabetes in patients referred for CABG. This is mainly in response to FREDOOM trial that showed that diabetic patients have a higher survival rate when they undergo surgical myocardial revascularization[4]. Over time, one of the reasons that made the CABG overlap percutaneous techniques was the anastomosis of the internal thoracic artery (ITA) on the left anterior descending artery. Long-term benefits would be related to higher patency of the ITA graft compared to the saphenous vein graft[5]. Later studies in large databases were able to show that the use of bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) increased further patient survival[6]. In this respect, only one prospective and randomized study showed no difference in one year and awaited long term outcomes[7].

Therefore, which could make us desist from using BITA? Demand for technical dissection of BITA and risk of deep sternal infection especially in diabetic patients would be the most frequent reasons. Gatti et al.[8] showed that even in insulin-dependent diabetic patient advantagens with BITA is over. This means that the longer survival achieved with BITA is not affected by a higher incidence of deep sternal wound infection (DSWI) in the short term[9]. In order to justify the risk of this complication, patients should have a life expectancy of >10 years. Therefore, they are contraindicated for the most part of the time in diabetic individuals[10].

CABG to insulin-dependent diabetic patient comprises various quality parameters. This begins with the classification in controlled and uncontrolled diabetics by glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c). It has been demonstrated that poorly controlled diabetes patients but not well-controlled diabetes significantly impairs endothelium-dependent and endothelium-independent relaxation of human peripheral microvasculature as compared with non-diabetes[11]. These changes may contribute to the less favorable postoperative outcomes after cardiac surgery. Complications and DSWI were significantly higher in uncontrolled (HbA1c >7%) than with controlled (<7%) diabetic patients[11]. Hyperglycemia in perioperative CABG increases up to 10 times the risk of morbidity and mortality. Thus, using protocols with continuous insulin drip to control hyperglycemia during the perioperative period (<180 mg/dl) reduced mortality, morbidity, incidence of DSWI, length of stay and increased long-term survival[12].

Skeletonization technique instead of pedicle preparation confers a protective benefit against sternal wound infection in patients receiving BITA and this should be the technique of choice for diabetics in whom BITA harvest is desired[13]. Because of diffuse atherosclerotic disease and complex coronary anatomy, complete revascularization in CABG is recommended for diabetic patients[14]. Even more than that, the use of BITA plus incomplete revascularization is better than single AIT plus complete revascularization in a twenty-year-survival[15]. Thereby, BITA is the most important to CABG in diabetic patients.

With respect to CABG be performed with or without the use of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), a subanalysis of the ROOBY trial show higher rates of incomplete revascularization in diabetic patients operated with off-pump surgery[16]. In addition, the graft patency after 1 year was significantly lower in the off-pump CABG (83.1%) when compared to on-pump CABG (88.4%). Raza et al.[15] shows that the hospital outcomes and long-term survival of patients undergoing off pump or on-pump surgery are similar.

The Guideline ESC / EACTS 2014 in CABG[17] recommends that the use of BITA should be considered in patients <70 years (Class IIa). Also, it provides that BITA in diabetic patients should be considered. Thus, all diabetic patients under 70 years, without morbid obesity and HbA1c <7% should receive BITA. On the other hand, skeletonized dissection of ITAs is recommended in these patients. After this support, the use of BITA as a quality standard in insulin-dependent diabetic patients is advised after CABG.

However. it might be best to avoid BITA grafting in obese diabetic women with diffuse atherosclerotic, the use of BITA becomes the best cost-effectiveness revascularization strategy to long term survival even in insulin-dependent diabetic patients. This is reinforced by a growing incidence in coronary artery disease in young individuals and increase in life expectancy in developing countries. Therefore, underutilized BITA, 4.4% in the STS database[18] and around 10% in the European Database[19], contradict the recommendations given by the respective host societies. REPLICCAR showed better results, and it is the first multicenter prospective cohort of patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery in São Paulo that has 10% of BITA[20].

In conclusion, BITA grafting is recommended for patients with diabetes undergoing CABG and efforts should be made to complete revascularization. DSWI, because of its rare occurrence, had little effect on morbidity and mortality increase. Accordingly, the state-of-the-art coronary artery bypass surgery in insulin-dependent diabetic patients considering the use of BITA is a quality parameter of health care.


1. Hammound T, Tanguay JF, Bourassa MG. Management of coronary artery disease: therapeutic options in patients with diabetes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;36(2):355-65. [MedLine]

2. ElBardissi AW, Aranki SF, Sheng S, O'Brien SM, Greenberg CC, Gammie JS. Trends in isolated coronary artery bypass grafting: an analysis of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons adult cardiac surgery database. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012;143(2):273-81. [MedLine]

3. Mejía OA, Lisboa LA, Dallan LA, Pomerantzeff PM, Trindade EM, Jatene FB, et al. Heart surgery programs innovation using surgical risk stratification at the São Paulo State Public Healthcare System: SP-SCORE-SUS study. Rev Bras Cir Cardiovasc. 2013;28(2):263-9. [MedLine] View article

4. Farkouh ME, Domanski M, Sleeper LA, Siami FS, Dangas G, Mack M, et al.; FREEDOM Trial Investigators. Strategies for multivessel revascularization in patients with diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(25):2375-84. [MedLine]

5. Loop FD, Lytle BW, Cosgrove DM, Stewart RW, Goormastic M, Williams GW, et al. Influence of the internal-mammary-artery graft on 10-year survival and other cardiac events. N Engl J Med 1986;314(1):1-6. [MedLine]

6. Lytle BW, Blackstone EH, Sabik JF, Houghtaling P, Loop FD, Cosgrove DM. The effect of bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting on survival during 20 postoperative years. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;78(6):2005-12.

7. Taggart DP, Altman DG, Gray AM, Lees B, Nugara F, Yu LM, et al.; ART Investigators. Randomized trial to compare bilateral vs. single internal mammary coronary artery bypass grafting: 1-year results of the Arterial Revascularisation Trial (ART). Eur Heart J. 2010;31(20):2470-81. [MedLine]

8. Gatti G, Soso P, Dell'Angela L, Maschietto L, Dreas L, Benussi B, et al. Routine use of bilateral internal thoracic artery grafts for left-sided myocardial revascularization in insulin-dependent diabetic patients: early and long-term outcomes. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2015;48(1):115-20. [MedLine]

9. Jatene FB, Kolh P. Bilateral internal thoracic artery grafts for myocardial revascularization in insulin-dependent diabetic patients: time for wide clinical practice? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2015;48(1):121-2. [MedLine]

10. Hoffman SN, TenBrook JA, Wolf MP, Pauker SG, Salem DN, Wong JB. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing coronary artery bypass graft with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty: one- to eight-year outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;41(8):1293-304. [MedLine]

11. Feng J, Liu Y, Chu LM, Singh AK, Dobrilovic N, Fingleton JG, et al. Changes in microvascular reactivity after cardiopulmonary bypass in patients with poorly controlled versus controlled diabetes. Circulation. 2012;126(11 Suppl 1):S73-80. [MedLine]

12. Fish LH, Weaver TW, Moore AL, Steel LG. Value of postoperative blood glucose in predicting complications and length of stay after coronary artery bypass grafting. Am J Cardiol. 2003;92(1):74-6. [MedLine]

13. Raja S. Bilateral internal mammary artery grafting in diabetics: outcomes, concerns and controversies. Int J Surg. 2015;16(Pt B):153-7.

14. Schwartz L, Bertolet M, Feit F, Fuentes F, Sako EY, Toosi MS, et al. Impact of completeness of revascularization on long-term cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: results from the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D). Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5(2):166-73. [MedLine]

15. Raza S, Sabik JF 3rd, Masabni K, Ainkaran P, Lytle BW, Blackstone EH. Surgical revascularization techniques that minimize surgical risk and maximize late survival after coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with diabetes mellitus. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;148(4):1257-64.

16. Shroyer AL, Hattler B, Wagner TH, Baltz JH, Collins JF, Carr BM, et al.;VA #517 Randomized On/Off Bypass (ROOBY) Study Group. Comparing off-pump and on-pump clinical outcomes and costs for diabetic cardiac surgery patients. Ann Thorac Surg. 2014;98(1):38-44. [MedLine]

17. Kolh P, Windecker S, Alfonso F, Collet JP, Cremer J, Falk V, et al.; Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery; European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions. 2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: the Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2014;46(4):517-92. [MedLine]

18. Tabata M, Grab JD, Khalpey Z, Edwards FH, O'Brien SM, Cohn LH, et al. Prevalence and variability of internal mammary artery graft use in contemporary multivessel coronary artery bypass graft surgery: analysis of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Cardiac Database. Circulation. 2009;120(11):935-40. [MedLine]

19. Bridgewater B, Keogh B, Kinsman R, Walton P. The Society for Cardiothoracic Surgery in Great Britain and Ireland: 6th National Adult Cardiac Surgical Database Report; Demonstrating Quality, 2008. Henley-on-Thames: Dendrite Clinical Systems Ltd.; 2009.

20. Oliveira MAP, Mejía OAV, Judas GN, Vieira JAC, Prado Jr PS, Conte PH, et al.; REPLICCAR Group. Short-Term Clinical Results of Double versus Single Internal Mammary Artery Bypass Grafting. AATS International Coronary Congress Meeting; 2015 Aug 21-23; New York, USA.

CCBY All scientific articles published at are licensed under a Creative Commons license


All rights reserved 2017 / © 2024 Brazilian Society of Cardiovascular Surgery DEVELOPMENT BY