Endoscopic Versus Open Radial Artery Harvesting: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled and Propensity Matched Studies

Mohamed Rahouma, Mohamed Kamel, Umberto Benedetto, Lucas B. Ohmes, Antonino Di Franco, Christopher Lau, Leonard Girardi, Robert F. Tranbaugh, Fabio Barili, Mario Gaudino

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

19 Citations (Scopus)
240 Downloads (Pure)


We sought to investigate the impact of radial artery harvesting techniques on clinical outcomes using a meta‐analytic approach limited to randomized controlled trials and propensity‐matched studies for clinical outcomes, in which graft patency was analyzed.

A systematic literature review was conducted using PubMed and MEDLINE to identify publications containing comparisons between endoscopic radial artery harvesting (ERAH) and open harvesting (ORAH). Only randomized controlled trials and propensity‐matched series were included. Data were extracted and analyzed with RevMan. The primary endpoint was wound complication rate, while secondary endpoints were patency rate, early mortality, and long‐term cardiac mortality.

Six studies comprising 743 patients were included in the meta‐analysis. Of them 324 (43.6%) underwent ERAH and 419 (56.4%) ORAH. ERAH was associated with a lower incidence of wound complications (odds ratio: 0.33, confidence interval 0.14‐0.77; p = 0.01). There were no differences in graft patency, and early and long‐term cardiac mortality between the two techniques.

ERAH reduces wound complications and does not affect graft patency, or short‐ and long‐term mortality compared to ORAH.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)334-341
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Cardiac Surgery
Issue number6
Early online date17 May 2017
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2017


  • coronary artery surgery
  • endoscopic radial artery harvesting
  • meta-analysis
  • patency rate
  • radial artery harvesting
  • wound complication


Dive into the research topics of 'Endoscopic Versus Open Radial Artery Harvesting: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled and Propensity Matched Studies'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this