Bilateral versus single internal thoracic artery grafting in hemodialysis patients

  • Hisaaki MunakataEmail author
  • Kazuyoshi Tajima
  • Wataru Kato
  • Keisuke Tanaka
  • Yoshiyuki Tokuda
  • Masato Mutsuga
  • Akihiko Usui
Original Article



The use of the bilateral internal thoracic arteries (BITAs) during myocardial revascularization reportedly provides a survival benefit over using a single internal thoracic artery (SITA). However, the advantages in chronic hemodialysis patients, who generally have multiple comorbidities, is unclear.


Outcomes of chronic hemodialysis patients who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) using a SITA with additional saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) (n = 33) or BITAs (n = 30) for left-side revascularization were retrospectively reviewed.


With the exception of the rate of diabetes mellitus (SITA vs. BITA: 84.8% vs. 50.0%; p = 0.003), the two groups showed similar patient characteristics. Using the off-pump technique, revascularization was completed without manipulation of the ascending aorta in 45.7% of patients in the BITA group, whereas all patients in the SITA group required aortic manipulation (p < 0.001). Of note, the incidence of extensive aortic calcification (>50% of ascending aorta circumference) was not uncommon (14.3%). The in-hospital mortality (3.0% vs. 0%, p = 0.336) and complication rates (including deep wound infection, re-exploration and stroke) were similar in both groups. The 5-year estimated survival rates for freedom from overall death in the SITA and BITA groups were 42.4% and. 57.4%, respectively (p = 0.202).


BITA grafting was able to achieve revascularization with minimal manipulation of the diseased ascending aorta without increasing the complication rate. The long-term survival benefit of BITA grafting, however, was unclear in dialysis patients, especially because such patients have a relatively short life expectancy.


Bilateral internal thoracic artery Hemodialysis patient Long-term survival 



No potential conflict of interest to disclose of the author, and co-authors.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest in association with the present study.


  1. 1.
    Taggart DP, D’Amico R, Altman DG. Effect of arterial revascularization on survival: a systematic review of studies comparing bilateral and single internal mammary arteries. Lancet. 2001;358:870–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Asai T, Suzuki T, Nota H, Kuroyanagi S, Kinoshita T, et al. Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting using skeletonized in situ arterial grafts. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2013;2:552–6.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Miyahara K, Matsuura A, Takemura H, Mizutani S, Saito S, Toyama M. Implementation of bundled interventions greatly decreases deep sternal wound infection following cardiovascular surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;148:2381–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Takami Y, Tajima K, Okada N, Fujii K, Sakai Y, Hibino M, et al. Simplified management of hemodialysis-dependent patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009;88:1515–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Abramowitz Y, Jilaihawi H, Chakravarty T, Mack MJ, Makkar RR. Porcelain aorta: a comprehensive review. Circulation. 2015;131:827–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Benedetto U, Amrani M, Raja SG, Harefield Cardiac Outcomes Research Group. Guidance for the use of bilateral internal thoracic arteries according to survival benefit across age groups. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;148:2706–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Benedetto U, Altman DG, Gerry S, Gray A, Lees B, Pawlaczyk R, et al. Pedicled and skeletonized single and bilateral internal thoracic artery grafts and the incidence of sternal wound complications: Insights from the arterial revascularization trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016;152:270–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Taggart DP, Altman DG, Gray AM, Lees B, Gerry S, Benedetto U, et al. Randomized trial of bilateral versus single internal-thoracic-artery grafts. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:2540–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    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;78:2005–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dorman MJ, Kurlansky PA, Traad EA, Galbut DL, Zucker M, Ebra G. Bilateral internal mammary artery grafting enhances survival in diabetic patients: a 30-year follow-up of propensity score-matched cohorts. Circulation. 2012;126:2935–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kieser TM, Lewin AM, Graham MM, Martin BJ, Galbraith PD, Rabi DM, et al. Outcomes associated with bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting: the importance of age. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011;92:1269–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Puskas JD, Sadiq A, Vassiliades TA, Kilgo PD, Lattouf OM. Bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting is associated with significantly improved long-term survival, even among diabetic patients. Ann Thorac Surg. 2012;94:710–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kai M, Okabayashi H, Hanyu M, Soga Y, Nomoto T, Matsuo T, et al. Long-term results of bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting in dialysis patients. Ann Thorac Surg. 2007;83:1666–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nakatsu T, Tamura N, Sakakibara Y, Hagio K, Ishigami M. Long-term survival after coronary arterial grafts in patients with end-stage renal disease. Ann Thorac Surg. 2010;90:738–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gatti G, Perrotti A, Fiore A, Bergoend E, Chocron S, Couetil JP, et al. Is bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting a safe option for chronic dialysis patients? Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2017;110:646–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nakahara Y, Yoshida S, Kanemura T, Yamagishi S, Toguchi S, Osaka S. Bilateral internal thoracic artery grafts in hemodialysis: a single-center propensity score analysis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2018;105:153–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    FitzGibbon GM, Kafka HP, Leach AJ, Keon WJ, Hooper GD, Burton JR. Coronary bypass graft fate and patient outcome: angiographic follow-up of 5065 grafts related to survival and reoperation in 1388 patients during 25 years. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;28:616–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Collins P, Webb CM, Chong CF, Moat NE, Radial Artery Versus Saphenous Vein Patency (RSVP) Trial Investigators. Radial artery versus saphenous vein patency randomized trial: five-year angiographic follow-up. Circulation. 2008;117:2859–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cho KR, Kim JS, Choi JS, Kim KB. Serial angiographic follow-up of grafts one year and five years after coronary artery bypass surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2006;29:511–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kim KB, Cho KR, Jeong DS. Midterm angiographic follow-up after off-pump coronary artery bypass: serial comparison using early, 1-year, and 5-year postoperative angiograms. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2008;135:300–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japanese Association for Thoracic Surgery 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Cardiac SurgeryNagoya University Graduate School of MedicineNagoyaJapan
  2. 2.Department of Cardiovascular SurgeryNagoya Daini Red Cross HospitalNagoyaJapan

Personalised recommendations