Morbidity of Conventional and No-touch Saphenectomy in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting, a Randomized Non-inferiority Clinical Trial

What this Trial Is About

Researchers are conducting a randomized clinical trial to compare the morbidity of two surgical techniques used to remove the internal saphenous vein for coronary artery bypass grafting. The study aims to determine whether the "no touch" technique is not inferior to the conventional method regarding wound complications such as infection, hematoma, blisters, secretions, necrosis, wound opening, numbness, pain, and functional limitations. This research is important because the conventional technique is more commonly used locally, while the no touch method has shown potential benefits but is less frequently applied. Participants will be randomly assigned to undergo either the conventional saphenous vein harvest, which removes only the vein, or the no touch technique, where the vein is taken along with surrounding tissue and the saphenous nerve. A total of 52 patients will be divided evenly between these two groups to compare outcomes. The study includes detailed tissue analysis using microscopy and annual computed tomography angiography to assess graft openness. During the study, patients will be monitored for wound-related complications at 1 week, 1 month, and 6 months after surgery. Researchers will assess local infections, hematomas, blisters, secretions, necrosis, wound reopening, numbness, pain, and walking difficulties. Data will be analyzed to identify factors influencing these outcomes. The study aims to provide clear comparisons of morbidity between the two vein harvesting methods over short- and long-term periods.

Morbidity of Conventional and No-touch Saphenectomy in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.