Study of Endoscopic Versus Open Harvest of the Radial Artery in Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery

Many surgical disciplines have been quick to adopt minimally invasive techniques because of decreased complications and shorter recovery times. As we enter the fifth decade of coronary artery bypass grafting surgery more attempts are being made to perform the operation less invasively. Harvesting of the saphenous vein (a large superficial vein in the leg which is routinely used in bypass surgery) using a telescope (camera), has been shown to be superior to harvesting the vein through a large open incision. At our institution, this vein mentioned above, is routinely harvested using less invasive techniques with a camera. This has been shown to result in less infection.

In the early 1990's, the radial artery was reintroduced into bypass surgery to increase the number of available alternative bypass grafts. Long-term results of the radial artery (8-9 years) have shown that 88-91% of the radial arteries harvested remain open thereby allowing the flow of blood. This is significantly better than the 10-year rates of the saphenous vein of 53-67%. Therefore, the radial artery has become more popular as a bypass graft.

Conventionally, the radial artery is harvested by making a long vertical incision extending from the wrist to the elbow. The radial artery is then dissected under direct vision within this large open incision. Complications from the open harvest of the radial artery include infection, neurological complications, possible decrease blood flow to the hand, and poor wound healing or scarring.

Recently, with the development of endoscopic harvesting systems, the radial artery can be harvested using a telescope (camera) and very small incisions. Thus far, to our knowledge there have been no published studies comparing conventional techniques to less invasive endoscopic techniques for harvesting the radial artery. Therefore, we propose a prospective randomized study to determine if the radial artery can be routinely harvested using an endoscopic minimally invasive technique. We wish to compare the conventional open technique to the minimally invasive technique to determine if there are any differences in postoperative complications, length of hospital stay or possible differences in patient satisfaction in cosmetic results (scarring) between the two techniques.

Inclusion criteria

• Eligible patients greater than 18 years of age with coronary artery disease requiring elective, urgent, or emergency coronary artery revascularization where the radial artery can be used as a bypass conduit.

Exclusion criteria

• Patient's refusal to have surgery, inability to give informed consent, and contraindication in harvesting the radial artery.