How do surgeons decide? Conduit choice in coronary artery bypass graft surgery in the UK

• Published in: Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery 2019-08, Vol.29 (2), p.179–186-186
• Main Authors: Jayakumar, Shruti, Gasparini, Marisa, Treasure, Tom, Burdett, Clare
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• ISSN: 1569-9285; 1569-9285
• DOI: 10.1093/icvts/ivz047

Conduits used in coronary artery bypass grafting may have significant impact on outcomes, but evidence is mixed and there is large variation in practice. This study provides insights into the opinions of the UK surgeons on conduit use and their decision-making processes. A questionnaire was created using the Ottawa Decision Support Framework to elicit the importance that surgeons placed on bilateral internal mammary artery grafting, skeletonization, total arterial revascularization and sequential anastomoses on a scale of 1-10. Scores ≥8 were deemed 'important' and ≤3 'not important'. Surgeons were asked to specify changes to practice in frail patients or emergencies. Additional questions included conduit type used, factors affecting decision-making and vein harvesting methods. Questionnaires were administered in person with data analysed centrally. Ninety-seven consultant cardiac surgeons from 25 centres responded. Thirty-two percent surgeons routinely used radial arteries and 36% used right internal mammary artery. High-quality evidence contributed most to decision-making receiving a total of 328/960 points, with consultant experience being the second (255/960 points). There was a bimodal distribution of perceived importance of bilateral internal mammary artery use, with 29 (30%) 'important' and 'not important' scores each. 23% of surgeons found total arterial revascularization important. Most surgeons (64%) preferred pedicled mammary arteries. Twenty-six percent of surgeons considered sequential grafting to be important. Low uptake of total arterial revascularization and bilateral internal mammary artery among the UK consultants may be due to the lack of high-quality evidence demonstrating a significant benefit. It is also possible that reluctance to use certain conduits may stem from low levels of exposure to conduits or inadequate training, particularly given the importance of consultant experience on decision-making.