title: Post harvest wound infection and patient's perception: comparative study between radial artery and saphenous vein harvest sites.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Despite renewed clinical interest in radial artery grafts (RA) for coronary artery bypass grafting, there is a paucity of controlled prospective data on its efficacy. We report on the rate of harvest related complications from a randomized radial artery study.
  
  
  METHODS
  Two hundred eighty nine patients were divided into two groups. Group 1 received RA grafts (n=154 patients) and Group 2 (n=135 patients) received saphenous vein grafts (SVG). Postoperative wound problems were assessed using a questionnaire. Postoperative harvest site infections were also carefully documented.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In group 1, 6 of 154 (3.9%) patients had harvest site wound infections. Five of them improved by antibiotic therapy alone. In group 2, 24 of 135 (17.8%) patients had harvest site wound infections (p=0.001 vs. group 1). Fifteen of these patients needed redressing due to discharge from the wound. One hundred forty-nine patients (96.7%) in group 1 answered that their hand function was normal on the questionnaire. Concerns and discomfort about the arm scars in the group 1 were of a similar value of 5.2% (8/154), respectively. In group 2, the incidence of those about the leg were 7.4% (10/135) and 11.9% (16/135), respectively. Although there was no significant difference in concerns about the scar, discomfort was significantly higher in group 2 compared with group 1 (p=0.0139).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  RA harvest is associated with fewer wound infections and scar discomfort than SVG harvest. Radial artery harvest is almost acceptable in terms of a patient's perception. However, there are still patients who have some symptoms in the forearm after RA harvest. Long-term follow-up is necessary for patient's hand function.
authors.affiliation: Department of Cardiac Surgery, Austin & Repatriation Medical Centre, University of Melbourne, Australia.
authors.forename: Mitsumasa
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Hata
authors.forename: Jai
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Raman
authors.forename: George
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Matalanis
authors.forename: Alexander
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Rosalion
authors.forename: Meg
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Storer
authors.forename: David
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Hare
authors.forename: Brian F
authors.initials: BF
authors.lastname: Buxton
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D001315:Australia / Q000453:epidemiology; D015992:Body Mass Index; D001026:Coronary Artery Bypass; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D005542:Forearm / Q000098:blood supply / Q000601:surgery; D006801:Humans; D007866:Leg / Q000098:blood supply / Q000601:surgery; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D015995:Prevalence; D017534:Radial Artery / Q000637:transplantation; D012501:Saphenous Vein / Q000637:transplantation; D013530:Surgical Wound Infection / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000209:etiology*; D016896:Treatment Outcome