Skeletonization versus pedicle preparation of the radial artery with and without the ultrasonic scalpel

Background The radial artery (RA) is increasingly used for myocardial revascularization because of its presumed advantageous long-term patency rates. The vessel can be harvested as a pedicle or skeletonized. The aim of this study was to compare the skeletonization technique with pedicle preparation using either an ultrasonic scalpel or scissors. Methods Forty consecutive patients with coronary artery disease undergoing complete arterial revascularization were included in the study. In 20 patients the RAs were prepared using scissors and clips (group 1: skeletonization; group 2: pedicle). In another 20 patients the arteries harvested were prepared using an ultrasonic scalpel (group 3: skeletonization; group 4: pedicle). The RA was treated with papaverine to prevent spasm of the vessel during and after harvesting. Tissue specimens of each RA were taken to analyze endothelial morphology by scanning electron microscopy. After implantation of the RA, graft perfusion was measured with a flow probe. Results Harvesting the RA as a skeletonized vessel took more time as compared with pedicle preparation (group 1 vs group 2: 37.1 ± 3.5 minutes vs 24.4 ± 3.9 minutes; p< 0.001 and group 3 vs group 4: 31.1 ± 3.5 minutes vs 25.6 ± 3.7 minutes; p< 0.01). The number of hemostatic titanium clips was similarly higher in group 1 as opposed to group 2 (58.7 ± 7.1 vs 38.7 ± 7.1; p< 0.01). However, there was no difference between groups 3 and 4 (p = 0.086). The length of the RA after skeletonization with scissors and clips was 20.8 ± 1.5 cm in contrast with 19.1 ± 0.9 cm (p< 0.01) after dissection as a pedicle. In the groups using the ultrasonic scalpel, there was no difference in graft length (p = 0.062). Mean blood flow through the graft after establishing the proximal anastomosis was similar among all groups (groups 1, 2, 3, and 4: 50 ± 20.1 mL/min, 53.8 ± 24.3 mL/min, 56.3 ± 25.1 mL/min, and 51.8 ± 23 mL/min, respectively). Scanning electron microscopy demonstrated endothelial damage in all patients in groups 1, 2, and 3 and in 7 patients of group 4. Most endothelial lesions were minor except in group 3 in which 1 of 5 endothelial lesions were severe. Statistically significant differences was found between groups 1 and 2, and 3 and 4 with respect to the degree of endothelial damage (p< 0.01). Conclusions Skeletonization using scissors and clips is more time consuming and technically more difficult, but yield significantly longer grafts. Skeletonization with an ultrasonic scalpel did not result in additional length and was more frequently associated with severe endothelial damage. Pedicle preparation using scissors or an ultrasonic scalpel is much simpler and faster, and does not jeopardize endothelial integrity.