What constitutes optimal surgical revascularization?: Answers from the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation (BARI)

Objectives The study was done to derive the optimum definition of complete revascularization in coronary artery bypass surgery. Background “Complete revascularization” has been considered the goal of coronary artery bypass operations, but various definitions of completeness exist. Methods We evaluated the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) surgical results in the seven years after operation. Different definitions of completeness of revascularization were retrospectively applied to the 1,507 patients in the combined randomized/registry group to derive the definition of complete operative revascularization with the best discrimination in long-term results between those with and without complete revascularization as defined. Four definitions were evaluated: 1) traditional complete revascularization with one graft to each major diseased artery system; 2) functional complete revascularization with one graft to all diseased major or primary segmental vessels; 3) number of distal anastomoses greater than, equal to or less than the number of diseased coronary segments; and 4) number of distal anastomoses to the major coronary systems equal to 1 or greater than 1. Results No independent survival advantage existed for traditional or functional complete revascularization as compared with incomplete revascularization. No survival advantage existed for any of the three arms of definition 3. For definition 4, seven-year death/myocardial infarction was highest (32.9%) when more than one anastomosis was constructed to any non-left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) system (relative risk 1.37, P = 0.03). No increased risk was associated with constructing more than one anastomosis into the LAD system. Conclusions The construction of more than one graft to any system other than the LAD appears to confer no long-term advantage, and may actually be deleterious.