Literature DB >> 30690021

Robotic Multivessel Endoscopic Coronary Bypass: Impact of a Beating-Heart Approach With Connectors.

Husam H Balkhy1, Sarah Nisivaco2, Hiroto Kitahara2, Mackenzie McCrorey2, Brooke Patel2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Most robotic coronary bypass operations are single-vessel procedures. Very few centers perform totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass (TECAB), and even fewer perform multivessel grafting endoscopically. We hypothesized that a robotic beating-heart approach using distal anastomotic connectors facilitates multivessel TECAB with similar safety and efficacy to single-vessel TECAB.
METHODS: We reviewed patients undergoing robotic TECAB at our institution between July 2013 and March 2018. There were 344 consecutive patients divided into two groups: multivessel (MV, group 1), and single-vessel (SV, group 2). We interrogated our prospectively collected database for preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative outcomes to compare the groups.
RESULTS: There were 197 patients in group 1 and 147 patients in group 2. Mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons scores were 1.69% ± 2.4% and 1.96% ± 3.5%, respectively (p = 0.389). Patients in group 1 were older, 67 ± 9.4 versus 63 ± 11.2 years (p < 0.001) and had more triple-vessel disease, 135 (69%) versus 31 (21%; p < 0.001). In group 1, 174 patients (88%) had bilateral internal mammary artery grafts and 13% had triple-vessel TECAB. Mean hospital stay was 3.07 ± 1.2 days in group 1 and 2.81 ± 1.4 days in group 2 (p = 0.072), and overall mortality was 1.45% (2.0% and 0.7%, respectively; p = 0.268). Graft patency (mean, 7 months) was 95.6% (151 of 158 grafts) in group 1 and 94.9% (37 of 39 grafts) in group 2 (p = 0.896).
CONCLUSIONS: Multivessel grafting is feasible during robotic beating-heart connector TECAB with good outcomes. We found no significant difference in mortality, hospital stay, midterm major adverse cardiac events, and interim graft patency compared with single-vessel TECAB. Further studies are warranted.
Copyright © 2019 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30690021     DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.12.044

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg        ISSN: 0003-4975            Impact factor:   4.330


  4 in total

Review 1.  Minimally invasive and robotic coronary artery bypass grafting-a 25-year review.

Authors:  Johannes Bonatti; Stephanie Wallner; Ingo Crailsheim; Martin Grabenwöger; Bernhard Winkler
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2021-03       Impact factor: 2.895

2.  Eleven-year outcomes of U-clips in totally robotic coronary artery bypass grafting versus standard hand-sewn running suture in robotic-assisted coronary artery bypass grafting.

Authors:  Nan Cheng; Huajun Zhang; Ming Yang; Guopeng Liu; Yi Guo; Wenbin Kang; Changqing Gao; Rong Wang
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2021-06-28

Review 3.  Minimally Invasive Coronary Revascularisation Surgery: A Focused Review of the Available Literature.

Authors:  Karel M Van Praet; Markus Kofler; Timo Z Nazari Shafti; Alaa Abd El Al; Antonia van Kampen; Andrea Amabile; Gianluca Torregrossa; Jörg Kempfert; Volkmar Falk; Husam H Balkhy; Stephan Jacobs
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2021-05-19

4.  Commentary: Almost ready for prime time.

Authors:  Lawrence M Wei
Journal:  JTCVS Tech       Date:  2020-06-24
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.