Predictors of Vein Graft Disease Progression Between One Week and One Year after Surgical Coronary Revascularization: Impact of Secondary Prevention Medications

Yi Yang,Yunpeng Zhu,Qi Yang,Haoyi Yao,Kaijie Qin,Haiqing Li,Mi Zhou,Y. E. Xiaofeng,Zhe Wang,Anqing Chen,Qiang Zhao
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocs.16895
IF: 1.778
2022-01-01
Journal of Cardiac Surgery
Abstract:Objective This study aimed to detect the predictors of vein graft disease (VGD) progression between 1 week and 1 year after surgery and to evaluate the impact of secondary prevention medications. Methods A total of 218 consecutive patients underwent surgical coronary revascularization were evaluated by coronary computed tomography angiography both at 1-week and 1-year follow-up. Logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate the predictors of VGD progression. A risk score (0-4) was set up to evaluate implementation result of secondary prevention measures according to 1-year follow-up result. Association between VGD progression and the risk score was assessed. Results VGD progression occurred in 11.3% of saphenous vein grafts (SVG) and 22.1% of patients. At the patient level, poor vein graft (odds ratio [OR] = 4.25), noncontrolled hyperlipidemia (OR = 3.01), and diabetes mellitus (DM) (OR = 2.96) were predictors, while diameter of SVG (mm, OR = 0.35) was protective factor. At the graft level, DM (OR = 3.52), noncontrolled hyperlipidemia (OR = 2.33), and peripheral artery disease (PAD) (OR = 2.20) were predictors, while number of SVGs (OR = 0.63), diameter of SVG (mm, OR = 0.39), and mean graft flow >25 ml/min (OR = 0.35) were protective factors. VGD progression was significantly associated with the risk score at both the patient (OR = 1.52) and the graft level (OR = 1.38). Conclusions Poor vein graft, noncontrolled hyperlipidemia and DM were predictors of VGD progression between 1 week and 1 year after surgery at the patient level, while larger SVG diameter was a protective factor. DM, PAD and noncontrolled hyperlipidemia were predictors at the graft level, while a number of SVGs, larger SVG diameter, and mean graft flow >25 ml/min were protective factors. Implementation failure of secondary prevention medications was associated with VGD progression from as early as 1 year after surgery.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?