Objective: The long-term benefits of multiple arterial revascularization (MAR) in coronary artery bypass grafting remain uncertain. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical outcome, graft patency, and need for subsequent target revascularization of radial artery (RA) versus saphenous vein graft in patients undergoing MAR in both patient- and graft-specific analyses. Methods: Between 2001 and 2016, we followed 1654 patients over a median of 7.4 years in a prospective, longitudinal study. Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, graft patency, and need for revascularization were assessed through clinical manifestation, coronary angiography, or coronary computed tomography and analyzed with propensity score–adjusted Cox regression, general estimating equation, and competing risk models. Results: Bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) grafting was performed in 910 patients (55.0%), and 744 patients (45.0%) received a left internal thoracic artery graft together with at least 1 RA graft. Patients receiving BITA, of whom 187 received an additional RA, showed improved survival (hazard ratio, 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38-0.86; P = .009), major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event–free survival (hazard ratio, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.23-0.46; P < .001), and lower need for repeat revascularization (subhzhard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39-0.90; P = .015). In a subgroup of 512 patients, comparing 419 RA with 487 saphenous vein grafts, RA grafting showed a lower risk for graft occlusion (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.47-0.73; P < .001) and target revascularization (subhazard ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43-0.78; P < .001). Conclusions: MAR with BITA and RA grafting revealed to be the recommended strategy in coronary artery bypass grafting to achieve long-term beneficial results. The use of saphenous vein graft showed less favorable outcomes regarding patency and the need for target-vessel revascularization.