Table 3.
CA branches | Healthy CA | Stenosed CA | Single graft revascularizationa | Sequential graft LIMA-OM |
---|---|---|---|---|
Inno. A | 554 | 479 (−13) | 477 (−14) | 475 (−14) |
LCCA | 125 | 129 (4) | 128 (3) | 128 (3) |
VA | 62 | 71 (14) | 70 (13) | 70 (13) |
LSA | 93 | 107 (15) | 106 (14) | 106 (14) |
Total H–N | 833 | 786 (−6) | 782 (−6) | 779 (−7) |
s1 | 13 | 12 (−3) | 12 (−4) | 12 (−4) |
LAD_main | 32 | 28 (−13) | 55 (69) | 33 (3) |
Diagonal | 20 | 17 (−12) | 17 (−13) | 21 (4) |
Total LAD | 65 | 58 (−11) | 84 (30) | 66 (2) |
RM | 27 | 29 (5) | 28 (3) | 28 (4) |
LCX_main | 36 | 31 (−14) | 37 (2) | 37 (2) |
OM | 31 | 27 (−14) | 32 (2) | 32 (2) |
m1 | 21 | 18 (−15) | 21 (1) | 21 (1) |
Total LCX | 88 | 76 (−14) | 90 (2) | 90 (2) |
RCA | 77 | 59 (−24) | 79 (3) | 80 (3) |
DAo | 3955 | 4039 (2) | 3984 (1) | 4004 (1) |
Acute flow adjustments in coronary flow are presented as percent variation (%) from the healthy baseline anatomy is given in the parenthesis
aAfter LIMA graft optimization coronary perfusion remained very similar (<2% variation) to the single graft revascularization level and these results are not presented in this table