Impact of endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest technique on late coronary artery bypass grafting patient outcomes in the ROOBY (Randomized On/Off Bypass) Trial

Objective: In the Randomized On/Off Bypass (ROOBY) Trial, the efficacy of on-pump versus off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting was evaluated. This ROOBY Trial planned subanalysis compared the effects on postbypass patient clinical outcomes and graft patency of endoscopic vein harvesting and open vein harvesting. Methods: From April 2003 to April 2007, the technique used for saphenous vein graft harvesting was recorded in 1471 cases. Of these, 894 patients (341 endoscopic harvest and 553 open harvest) also underwent coronary angiography 1 year after coronary artery bypass grafting. Univariate and multivariable analyses were used to compare patient outcomes in the endoscopic and open groups. Results: Preoperative patient characteristics were statistically similar between the endoscopic and open groups. Endoscopic vein harvest was used in 38% of the cases. There were no significant differences in both short-term and 1-year composite outcomes between the endoscopic and open groups. For patients with 1-year catheterization follow-up (n = 894), the saphenous vein graft patency rate for the endoscopic group was lower than that in the open harvest group (74.5% vs 85.2%, P < .0001), and the repeat revascularization rate was significantly higher (6.7% vs 3.4%, P < .05). Multivariable regression documented no interaction effect between endoscopic approach and off-pump treatment. Conclusions: In the ROOBY Trial, endoscopic vein harvest was associated with lower 1-year saphenous vein graft patency and higher 1-year revascularization rates, independent of the use of off-pump or on-pump cardiac surgical approach.