Methods: A total of 1,240 patients (856 males, 384 females; mean age 57.4±12.1 years; range, 47 to 74 years), who underwent isolated on-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery via median sternotomy performed by the same surgical team, were reviewed retrospectively. With the introduction of transit-time flow measurement into practice at our clinic in 2006, all patients regularly underwent transit-time flow measurement during surgery in order to evaluate the graft patency. Interpretation of the data obtained using the transit-time flow measurement in patients who underwent surgery has directed our decision as to whether to perform graft revision. Patients were evaluated for early- and late-period mortality/ morbidity, perioperative and postoperative myocardial infarction, and intraaortic balloon requirement.
Results: A total of 3,596 grafts in the perioperative period was evaluated using transit-time flow measurement. Anastomosis/graft revision, new anastomosis/patch plasty to distal native artery or free left internal mammary artery graft was performed in 146 grafts of 143 patients in whom transittime flow measurement showed insufficient patency. Four of six patients who developed peri/postoperative myocardial infarction were found to have perioperative hypotension, ST elevation, and wall motion abnormality on transesophageal echocardiography before closure of the sternum. The flow was corrected by extending the short length of the grafts with insufficient flow after transit-time flow measurement and it was recorded that transit-time flow measurements were at normal values at these four grafts. Two patients developed acute myocardial infarction in the postoperative period and stent was applied in one vessel of each patient; however, one of these patients died. Sixteen patients were inserted intraaortic balloon pump, four of which being in the preoperative period. Revision surgery was performed due to bleeding in 56 patients and sternal infection in 12 patients. Of all patients, 28 (2.3%) died in the early postoperative period.
Conclusion: We believe that transit-time flow measurement may be an important tool in evaluating graft function and contribute to eliminate the causes of graft failure during surgery.
The purpose of this study is to assess the effect of intraoperative TTFM on the detection of graft dysfunction on pump-induced CABG results.
Surgical procedure
All patients were premedicated with 0.07-0.1 mg/kg
midazolam. Anesthesia was performed with fentanyl
and propofol, while vecuronium was used for muscle
relaxation. Every patients was subjected to median
sternotomy, and the left internal mammary artery
(LIMA), saphenous vein graft (SVG) and/or radial
artery grafts were used as graft material. The first dose of heparin was given to each patient at 3 mg/kg
and the active coagulation time (ACT) was maintained
above 450 seconds. All interventions were performed
with mild hypothermic cardiopulmonary bypass and
cross clamping. Cardiac arrest was first performed
with antegrade crystalloid cardioplegia, followed by
antegrade and left main coronary artery containing
the potassium, and an additional continuous retrograde
blood cardioplegia to patients with an equivalent. Hot
blood cardioplegia was ultimately performed. Distal
anastomoses were performed with the 7-0 or 8-0
polypropylene continuous suture technique. Proximal
anastomoses were performed with 5-0 or 6-0
polypropylene continuous suture technique in the
ascending aorta. After decannulation, heparin was
neutralized with protamine. Fractional heparin (s.c.)
was administered at the fourth postoperative hour and
continued until the patient was mobilized. Treatment
with low-dose aspirin (100 mg) was initiated one
day after the operation and this treatment was later
continued.
The protocol prepared by DAncona et al.[10-12] was used during TTFM. Inotropic agents were used to maintain a systolic pressure of 90-100 mmHg in patients with low blood pressure prior to the measurement. The TTFM device (MediStim VQ-1101, MediStim ASA, Oslo, Norway) was used for the evaluation of each graft after completion of anastomosis during the operation and before the sternum could be closed. Flow in both the proximal and distal segments of the graft were examined in patients with sequential bypass surgery. Measurements were made by examining whether or not the proximal native coronary artery was occluded, in order to assess the presence of any competition in the native vessels and to detect the presence of any potential defect localized distally to the anastomosis, and where native retrograde blood flow was present. Flow curves images and mean flow (mL/min), pulsatility index (PI) and the diastolic filling percentage (DF%) were recorded automatically by the device. A DF <50% and/or PI >5 was considered as an indication of poor flow. The mean flow was not used alone as a sign of weak flow and was evaluated together with the other two parameters. Interpretation of the values obtained made it possible for us to decide on whether or not a graft was to be revised. The graft length and characteristics were examined when insufficient TTFM findings were detected. It was also examined for bending, curling, air bubbles or spasm. Corrections were made if any of these conditions was detected. Arterial grafts were applied over the papaverine/nitroglycerine graft to resolve any possible spasm. In the absence of any problem with the graft, an opening in the graft was made with a small incision about 1 cm proximal to the anastomosis. Patency of the distal anastomosis and native coronary artery were examined using antegrade graft blood flow and a 1.5 mm coronary probe (Figure 1). Any stenoses detected in the anastomotic region were revised. A new anastomosis was made with either the same graft or another graft, either in the distal anastomosis, or in native vascular problems such as dissection or plaque rupture. Revision of anastomosis was performed on a functioning heart or during ventricular fibrillation for the vessels on the anterior surface of the heart, and by cross clamping during diastolic arrest for vessels on the posterior aspect of the heart. All measurements were repeated before the sternum could be closed in order to determine a possible graft curling or pressure, even if satisfactory TTFM findings were obtained during the final measurement.
Figure 1: Examination of the anastomosis.
Statistical analysis
Statistical analysis of the data was performed
using the IBM SPSS 20.0 for Windows package program (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Descriptive
statistics for continuous variables were demonstrated
as mean±standard deviation or median (minimummaximum),
while categorical variables were shown as
cases numbers and percentages. The receiver operating
characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed
to determine the efficacy of PI, DF% and Q-mean
variables when predicting early graft failure. The
area under the curve for each variable, sensitivity,
specificity, 95% safety interval, and p-value were also
reported.
Table 1: Demographic characteristics of patients and preoperative risk factors
Table 2: Intraoperative patient data (n=1,240)
Table 3: Intraoperative transit time flow measurement findings before sternal closure
Table 4: Causes of graft revision, the number of grafts and target vessels being examined
Table 5: Postoperative characteristics of patients (n=1,240)
Several techniques have been used in the past to perform intraoperative assessment of graft patency.
Electromagnetic flow meters which were initially adopted for use in coronary surgery have recently been replaced by ultrasonic technology (Doppler and TTFM). Several authors who have adopted using the TTFM technique have reported very successful results in detecting technical errors during CABG and in resolving any problem which develops during the same operation.[1,7,9,10-12] In their study, Schmitz et al.[15] compared o n-pump and off-pump patients with regards to TTFM and graft flows and demonstrated that on-pump patients had better flow values, whereas in the study by Zhuang et al.[16] similar flow values were reported in both groups; in both studies the authors suggested that it could be an effective method in the revision of graft failure during the operation. Comparison of graft flows in on-pump and off-pump patients was not normally performed, since on-pump CABG patients were included in the study. However, in a total of 3,596 grafts performed in the 1,240 patients who were included in the study, 146 (4.1%) showed that the necessity of revision during intraoperative TTFM measurement could be an effective method for evaluating and revising perioperative graft failure, and may also improve operative success.
In a study evaluating 157 patients and 304 grafts with intraoperative TTFM and postoperative angiography, TTF measurement data were reported to be independent predictors of graft failure, were suggested to be considered for occlusion in the presence of high PI and low flow states.[7] Studies suggest that good intraoperative TTFM findings may be a determining factor in predicting early and late graft patency.[2,7,10] On the other hand, no comment could be made in our study as to whether TTFM measurement data are independent predictors of graft failure since our study did not include long-term follow-up data of patients undergoing intraoperative TTFM measurements.
DAncona et al.[11] and Walpoth et al.[17] reported that a technical failure with TTFM, of 6% and 8% of all patients could be detected and this problem could be resolved during the same operation. This provides a considerable benefit in protecting the patient from perioperative complications. However, the revision rate of grafts in our study was found to be 4.1%.
The three important flow parameters in TTFM are; flow, DF% and PI. Flow (i) is expressed by a flow curve showing the systolic and diastolic filling of the graft via color coding (systolic: light red, diastolic: light blue) and (ii) mean flow value (mL/min). In order to accurately distinguish systolic blood flow from diastolic flow, the curves should always be combined with correctly connected electrocardiography (ECG) monitoring. Mean flow is dependent on many variables such as, blood viscosity, graft size and quality, resistance in the graft, distal vessel quality, native coronary artery diameter and spasms in arterial grafts. Absolute blood flow value is not a good indicator of anastomotic quality and should be considered together with the other two indicators and clinical findings (ECG, hemodynamic values). DF% indicates coronary filling rate during diastole. Using ECG synchronization, DF% is defined as the blood volume filled during diastole divided by the total blood volume in a heart cycle. DF% is particularly important in conditions with low flow where the average flow rate is less than 10 mL/min. The reason for this is the fact that DF% constitutes the metabolic component of the flow. Recent studies indicate that the most important indicator for confirming intraoperative graft patency is DF%.[18] Pulsatility index, which is expressed as an absolute number, is a good indicator of flow and hence the quality of anastomosis. This number is obtained by dividing the difference between maximum flow and the minimum flow by the average flow value. Pulsatility index is proportional to vascular resistance. Consequently, a high PI is an indicator of poor quality graft or anastomosis.
Becit et al.[18] compared 200 patients who underwent isolated on-pump coronary bypass surgery with median sternotomy, and who had similar demographic characteristics and preoperative risk factors in our clinic in 2006. Comparison was made by dividing patients into two groups as those who were subjected to TTFM measurements and those who were not, and it was demonstrated that lower mortality, peri/postoperative myocardial infarction and IABP insertion rates in the TTFM measurement and when necessary, in the revision group, was an indication of statistical significance (p<0.05). In their studies, it was shown that the determination of intraoperative graft dysfunction with TTFM improved surgical outcomes. After this study that conducted in our clinic, routine application of intraoperative TTFM measurement was instituted during CABG operations to increase bypass quality and also improve surgical outcomes. As indicated in the study by Becit et al.[18] regarding the group using TTFM, our study demonstrated that peri/ postoperative complications, morbidity/mortality rates and surgical outcomes were similar.
In this study, the protocol recommended by DAncona et al.[10-12] was used to determine graft dysfunction. Immediately after completing the anastomosis during cardiopulmonary bypass, the TTFM measurement was performed and several more TTFM measurements were undertaken to identify problems that could arise from possible graft twisting or pressure from the manipulation, before the sternum was closed-up. Systemic pressure should closely be monitored under condition where arterial grafts are used. Low systemic pressure, manipulation, and decreased blood flow can cause graft spasm. In patients with low blood pressure, inotropic agents were used to maintain a systolic pressure of 90-100 mmHg. The probe size used to measure the flow and good contact with the probe is important for accurate measurement. The importance of TTFM in the evaluation of coronary artery bypass grafts is based on interpretation of the data. As a result, the flow curves, PI, DF% and the mean flow values were measured simultaneously to correctly interpret TTFM findings, which are very important to reduce the number of undetected technical errors in our study. Studies show that graft dysfunction was present in 0.6-3.2% of grafts and in 1.8-8.1% of patients.[11,16-22] In in our study these values were demonstrated as 4.1% and 11.5%, respectively.
Our results suggest that TTFM may be effective in detecting intraoperative graft dysfunction.
Transit time flow measurement provides important intraoperative information about the condition and patency of coronary grafts. It can ensure accurate diagnosis of problems in the distal anastomotic region such as anastomotic stenosis, plaque rupture, dissection; and technical problems such as curled, twisted, or stenotic/dissected grafts, allowing for intraoperative revision in the event of graft failure and helping to resolve many unrecognized graft problems.
Declaration of conflicting interests The authors declared no conflicts of interest with respect to the authorship and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research
and/or authorship of this article.
1) Bauer SF, Bauer K, Ennker IC, Rosendahl U, Ennker
J. Intraoperative bypass flow measurement reduces the
incidence of postoperative ventricular fibrillation and
myocardial markers after coronary revascularisation. Thorac
Cardiovasc Surg 2005;53:217-22.
2) Sanisoglu I, Guden M, Balci C, Sagbas E, Duran C,
Akpinar B. Comparison of intraoperative transit-time flow
measurement with early postoperative magnetic resonance
flow mapping in off-pump coronary artery surgery. Tex
Heart Inst J 2003;30:31-7.
3) Mujanovic E, Kabil E, Hadziselimovic M, Softic M, Azabagic
A, Bersland J. Transit time flow measurements in coronary
surgery: the experience from a new center in Bosnia. Heart
Surg Forum 2002;5:233-6.
4) Hu S, Wang X, Song Y, Lu F. Graft patency in offpump
and conventional coronary artery bypass grafting
for treatment of triple vessel coronary disease. Chin Med J
(Engl) 2003;116:436-9.
5) Stover EP, Siegel LC, Parks R, Levin J, Body SC, Maddi R,
et al. Variability in transfusion practice for coronary artery
bypass surgery persists despite national consensus guidelines:
a 24-institution study. Institutions of the Multicenter Study of
Perioperative Ischemia Research Group. Anesthesiology
1998;88:327-33.
6) Leong DK, Ashok V, Nishkantha A, Shan YH, Sim EK.
Transit-time flow measurement is essential in coronary
artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg 2005;79:854-7.
7) Di Giammarco G, Pano M, Cirmeni S, Pelini P, Vitolla G,
Di Mauro M. Predictive value of intraoperative transit-time
flow measurement for short-term graft patency in coronary
surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2006;132:468-74.
8) Sönmez B, Arbatli H, Tansal S, Yagan N, Unal M, Demirsoy
E, et al. Real-time patency control with thermal coronary
angiography in 1401 coronary artery bypass grafting patients.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2003;24:961-6.
9) Hirotani T, Kameda T, Shirota S, Nakao Y. An evaluation
of the intraoperative transit time measurements of coronary
bypass flow. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2001;19:848-52.
10) DAncona G, Karamanoukian HL, Bergsland J. Is intraoperative
measurement of coronary blood flow a good predictor of graft
patency? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2001;20:1075-7.
11) DAncona G, Karamanoukian HL, Ricci M, Schmid S,
Bergsland J, Salerno TA. Graft revision after transit time
flow measurement in off-pump coronary artery bypass
grafting. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2000;17:287-93.
12) Jokinen JJ, Werkkala K, Vainikka T, Peräkylä T, Simpanen
J, Ihlberg L. Clinical value of intra-operative transit-time
flow measurement for coronary artery bypass grafting:
a prospective angiography-controlled study. Eur J
Cardiothorac Surg 2011;39:918-23.
13) Kjaergard HK. Baseline flow in coronary bypass grafts. J
Card Surg 2005;20:205-7.
14) Gwozdziewicz M. Cardiomed coronary flow meter for
prevention of early occlusion in aortocoronary bypass
grafting. Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech
Repub 2004;148:59-61.
15) Schmitz C, Ashraf O, Schiller W, Preusse CJ, Esmailzadeh
B, Likungu JA, et al. Transit time flow measurement in
on-pump and off-pump coronary artery surgery. J Thorac
Cardiovasc Surg 2003;126:645-50.
16) Zhuang Y, Chen X, Lua Zq, Xu M, Jiang Ys, Xiao Lq. Evaluation
of graft flow between on-pump and off-pump coronary artery
bypass grafting. Asian Biomedicine 2012;6:265-71.
17) Walpoth BH, Bosshard A, Genyk I, Kipfer B, Berdat PA,
Hess OM, et al. Transit-time flow measurement for detection of early graft failure during myocardial revascularization.
Ann Thorac Surg 1998;66:1097-100.
18) Becit N, Erkut B, Ceviz M, Unlu Y, Colak A, Kocak H. The
impact of intraoperative transit time flow measurement on
the results of on-pump coronary surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac
Surg 2007;32:313-8.
19) Groom R, Tryzelaar J, Forest R, Niimi K, Cecere G, Donegan
D, et al. Intra-operative quality assessment of coronary artery
bypass grafts. Perfusion 2001;16:511-8.
20) Jakobsen HL, Kjaergard HK. Severe impairment of
graft flow without electrocardiographic changes during
coronary artery bypass grafting. Scand Cardiovasc J
1999;33:157-9.