Shahzad G Raja1, Sheena Garg1, Melissa Rochon2, Siobhan Daley3, Fabio De Robertis1, Toufan Bahrami1. 1. Department of Cardiac Surgery, Harefield Hospital, London, UK. 2. Department of Quality & Safety (Surveillance section), Harefield Hospital, London, UK. 3. Department of Quality & Safety (Audit section), Harefield Hospital, London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) grafting is regarded as an alternative to conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) through full sternotomy, particularly for patients with isolated proximal left anterior descending (LAD) artery stenosis deemed unsuitable for percutaneous coronary intervention. However, the technically demanding nature of the procedure and lack of long-term published outcomes have precluded its universal adoption. We report the comparative short-term outcomes and long-term survival of MIDCAB and conventional CABG through full sternotomy for grafting of isolated LAD. METHODS: From February 1996 to October 2017, a total of 668 patients underwent MIDCAB (n=508) and full sternotomy (n=160) CABG for isolated proximal LAD stenosis. Their data were prospectively entered into the institutional cardiac surgery database (Patients Analysis & Tracking System; Dendrite Clinical Systems, Ltd, Oxford, England, United Kingdom) and analyzed retrospectively. Information on patient deaths was obtained from the institutional database and the National General Register Office for all patients. RESULTS: The two groups were comparable with respect to preoperative demographics and risk profile. MIDCAB was associated with longer operative time (177±32 versus 141±12 min; P=0.003). The two groups did not significantly differ with regard to other complications including operative mortality. At a mean follow-up of 12.95±0.47 years, survival was also similar. CONCLUSIONS: This large single centre study with longest follow-up validates the status of MIDCAB as an effective strategy for grafting of LAD. However, it fails to show superiority of the minimally invasive approach compared to conventional CABG through full sternotomy.
BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) grafting is regarded as an alternative to conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) through full sternotomy, particularly for patients with isolated proximal left anterior descending (LAD) artery stenosis deemed unsuitable for percutaneous coronary intervention. However, the technically demanding nature of the procedure and lack of long-term published outcomes have precluded its universal adoption. We report the comparative short-term outcomes and long-term survival of MIDCAB and conventional CABG through full sternotomy for grafting of isolated LAD. METHODS: From February 1996 to October 2017, a total of 668 patients underwent MIDCAB (n=508) and full sternotomy (n=160) CABG for isolated proximal LAD stenosis. Their data were prospectively entered into the institutional cardiac surgery database (Patients Analysis & Tracking System; Dendrite Clinical Systems, Ltd, Oxford, England, United Kingdom) and analyzed retrospectively. Information on patient deaths was obtained from the institutional database and the National General Register Office for all patients. RESULTS: The two groups were comparable with respect to preoperative demographics and risk profile. MIDCAB was associated with longer operative time (177±32 versus 141±12 min; P=0.003). The two groups did not significantly differ with regard to other complications including operative mortality. At a mean follow-up of 12.95±0.47 years, survival was also similar. CONCLUSIONS: This large single centre study with longest follow-up validates the status of MIDCAB as an effective strategy for grafting of LAD. However, it fails to show superiority of the minimally invasive approach compared to conventional CABG through full sternotomy.
Entities:
Keywords:
Proximal left anterior descending artery; left internal mammary artery (LIMA); minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB); minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting (MIDCAB grafting); minimally invasive revascularization
Authors: David M Holzhey; Jan P Cornely; Ardawan J Rastan; Piroze Davierwala; Friedrich W Mohr Journal: Heart Surg Forum Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 0.676
Authors: G Pompilio; F Alamanni; P M Tartara; C Antona; M Porqueddu; F Veglia; P Biglioli Journal: J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 1.888
Authors: Jef Van den Eynde; Hannah Vaesen Bentein; Tom Decaluwé; Herbert De Praetere; MaryAnn C Wertan; Francis P Sutter; Husam H Balkhy; Wouter Oosterlinck Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2021-07 Impact factor: 2.895
Authors: Jan Gofus; Stepan Cerny; Youssef Shahin; Zdenek Sorm; Martin Vobornik; Petr Smolak; Ananya Sethi; Samuel Marcinov; Mikita Karalko; James Chek; Jan Harrer; Jan Vojacek; Marek Pojar Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-08-30