Minimally invasive heart surgery. Executive Committee of the Council on Cardio-Thoracic and Vascular Surgery.

Abstract

HomeCirculationVol. 94, No. 10Minimally Invasive Heart Surgery Free AccessResearch ArticleDownload EPUBAboutView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toFree AccessResearch ArticleDownload EPUBMinimally Invasive Heart Surgery Renee´ S. Hartz and Renee´ S. HartzRenee´ S. Hartz Search for more papers by this author and Search for more papers by this author and On behalf of the Executive Committee of the Council on Cardio-Thoracic and Vascular Surgery Originally published15 Nov 1996https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.94.10.2669Circulation. 1996;94:2669–2670Limited access or minimally invasive coronary artery surgery is being evaluated in numerous North American medical centers. The purposes of this report are to (1) describe the techniques, (2) examine progress in this new field, (3) comment on the potential of these approaches, and (4) put into perspective the expected goals of minimally invasive coronary surgery, given the proven long-term results achieved with traditional techniques (sternotomy and cardiopulmonary bypass).Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass is performed using one of two approaches: (1) a series of small holes or “ports” in the chest (referred to as PACAB, PortCAB, or port-access coronary artery bypass) or (2) a combination of ports and a small incision directly over the coronary artery to be bypassed (referred to as MIDCAB or minimally invasive coronary artery bypass). As in standard coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG), anesthesia is required.PACAB is currently used only by investigators at a few university centers. In this method, cardiopulmonary bypass is performed using the femoral vessels. The heart is stopped and the bypasses are performed using instruments passed through the ports, with or without a small additional chest incision. As with abdominal laparoscopic surgery, the cardiac surgeon views these operations on video monitors rather than directly.The MIDCAB procedure combines both direct and indirect techniques. In contrast to PACAB, it is performed with the intention of avoiding cardiopulmonary bypass. Initially developed in countries where economic resources for cardiopulmonary bypass procedures are limited (most notably Argentina, Brazil, and Italy), MIDCAB is performed on a beating heart. In contrast to PACAB, the procedure was designed for bypassing only one or two coronary arteries; since suturing is done under direct vision, the coronary artery to be bypassed must lie directly beneath the incision. The coronary bypass is usually performed using the left internal mammary artery (LIMA), which lies on the inside of the chest wall very near the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD). The LIMA is dissected from the chest wall using direct vision and/or video guidance, depending on the patient's anatomy and the surgeon's preference. Afterward the LIMA is sutured directly to the LAD. Occasionally the right internal mammary artery is used to bypass the right coronary artery. By mid-1996 at least 200 MIDCAB procedures had been performed in various universities and private hospitals throughout the United States and several hundred more in Europe and South America.The Council on Cardio-Thoracic and Vascular Surgery of the AHA has been carefully monitoring the use of these two procedures. Despite tremendous enthusiasm on the part of patients, industry, and the press, their widespread adoption cannot be endorsed until suitable data have accumulated and a conscientious critique can be done. The role of minimally invasive coronary bypass in the treatment of patients with single-vessel coronary artery disease will be defined only by such careful comparative studies. Natural history studies of medically treated patients demonstrate a good long-term prognosis, except for the subgroup with severe proximal LAD stenosis. Conversely, observational studies suggest that angioplasty may provide a slightly better long-term survival benefit than bypass surgery for patients with single-vessel disease.1These facts suggest that the role of minimally invasive coronary bypass in patients with single-vessel coronary disease will, for now, be limited to the few who need interventional therapy but are not suitable candidates for coronary angioplasty due to their anatomy, ie, those who have undergone one or more failed angioplasties, or those who elect surgical revascularization instead. There is no expectation that a smaller incision will greatly alter the rate of cardiac death after bypass. If coronary surgery can be made so noninvasive to be considered equally invasive to coronary angioplasty by the patient, the more definitive nature of surgery would represent a distinct advantage over angioplasty. However, all current minimally invasive bypass techniques are more invasive than angioplasty, and general anesthesia is necessary.The most likely future application for minimally invasive surgery is in patients with extensive disease now known to have a survival benefit from the standard bypass. Recent randomized trials demonstrating equivalent 5-year survival in patients with two- and three-vessel disease who have undergone revascularization by either angioplasty or bypass surgery suggest that complete revascularization may not be as necessary as previously believed.234 Those patients with the most severe disease confined to the LAD and right coronary artery might be well served by two internal mammary artery grafts to these vessels. If this operation can be performed safely using minimally invasive techniques, efficacy comparable to standard coronary bypass might be proved in these patients.MIDCAB is easier on the patient and is probably less expensive than traditional CABG. Nonetheless, compared with traditional CABG, exposure is limited and performance of the anastomosis more difficult. Significant ischemia leading to hemodynamic compromise of the patient may occur. Therefore, the procedure must be performed with the availability of cardiopulmonary bypass. Predictably, urgent conversion to conventional open-chest methods has occasionally been necessary.We must neither ignore the very real potential for these new procedures nor trivialize innovations. Rather, we must critically evaluate MIDCAB and PACAB in terms of time-honored end points: immediate and long-term graft patencies and absence of cardiac ischemia. An inclusive database or registry will be established, and minimally invasive techniques will be critically evaluated. This project is being undertaken by a joint committee of members of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons and the American Association of Thoracic Surgeons.“Minimally Invasive Heart Surgery” was approved by the American Heart Association Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee in August 1996.A single reprint is available by calling 800-242-8721 (US only) or writing the American Heart Association, 7272 Greenville Ave, Dallas, TX 75231-4596. Ask for reprint No. 71-0095.The author thanks Timothy J. Gardner, MD; Alden H. Harken, MD; Robert H. Jones, MD; and D. Craig Miller, MD, for their contributions to the development of this advisory. References 1 Jones RH, Kesler K, Phillips HR III, Mark DB, Smith PK, Nelson CL, Newman MF, Reves JG, Anderson RW, Califf RM. Long-term survival benefits of coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg.1996; 111:1013-1025.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar2 RITA Trial Participants. Coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery: the Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) trial. Lancet.1993; 341:573-580.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3 King SB III, Lembo NJ, Weintraub WS, Kosinski AS, Barnhart HX, Kutner MH, Alazraki NP, Guyton RA, Zhao X. For the Emory Angioplasty Versus Surgery Trial (EAST). A randomized trial comparing coronary antioplasty with coronary bypass surgery. N Engl J Med.1994; 331:1044-1050.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4 Hamm CW, Reimers J, Ischinger T, Rupprecht H, Berger J, Bleifeld W. For the German Angioplasty Investigation. German Angioplasty Bypass Surgery Investigation. A randomized study of coronary angioplasty compared with bypass surgery in patients with symptomatic multivessel coronary disease. N Engl J Med.1994; 331:1037-1043.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Previous Back to top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited By Gururaj S, Applequist A, Bhattarai S, Appaji A and Kadambi P (2020) Self-Powered Cardiac Pacemaker: The Viability of a Piezoelectric Energy Harvester 2020 International Conference on COMmunication Systems & NETworkS (COMSNETS), 10.1109/COMSNETS48256.2020.9027333, 978-1-7281-3187-0, (70-75) Ling Y, Bao L, Yang W, Chen Y and Gao Q (2016) Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting with an improved rib spreader and a new-shaped cardiac stabilizer: results of 200 consecutive cases in a single institution, BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, 10.1186/s12872-016-0216-4, 16:1, Online publication date: 1-Dec-2016. Alkady H and Abdelrahman A (2016) A comparative study between L shaped ministernotomy and conventional mitral valve surgery, Journal of the Egyptian Society of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 10.1016/j.jescts.2016.05.003, 24:1, (21-26), Online publication date: 1-May-2016. Dash D (2014) An update on coronary bypass graft intervention, Heart Asia, 10.1136/heartasia-2013-010478, 6:1, (41-45), Online publication date: 6-Mar-2014. Sun H, Ma W, Xu J, Sun L, Lu F and Zhu X (2016) Minimal Access Heart Surgery via Lower Ministernotomy: Experience in 460 Cases, Asian Cardiovascular and Thoracic Annals, 10.1177/021849230601400206, 14:2, (109-113), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2006. Icard P, Page O, Massetti M, Alkofer B, Rochais J and Khayat A (2003) Resection of anterior mediastinal tumor through a ministernotomy: Preliminary experience with ten cases, The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 10.1067/mtc.2003.136, 125:2, (432-434), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2003. Mumby S, Koh T, Pepper J and Gutteridge J (2001) Risk of iron overload is decreased in beating heart coronary artery surgery compared to conventional bypass, Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Molecular Basis of Disease, 10.1016/S0925-4439(01)00070-9, 1537:3, (204-210), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2001. Scott R (2001) Our contributions: scholarship revisited, The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 10.1016/S0003-4975(00)02394-8, 71:2, (S30-S54), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2001. Bhan A, Choudhary S, Mathur A, Sharma R, Sahoo M, Agrawal R and Venugopal P (2000) Surgical myocardial revascularization without cardiopulmonary bypass, The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 10.1016/S0003-4975(99)01581-7, 69:4, (1216-1221), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2000. Mackenzie B, Croxson R and Cumming G (2000) Cardiovascular Disorders Medical Selection of Life Risks, 10.1007/978-1-349-14499-0_21, (303-479), . Maslow A, Park K, Pawlowski J, Haering J and Cohn W (1999) Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting: Changes in anesthetic management and surgical procedure, Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia, 10.1016/S1053-0770(99)90213-6, 13:4, (417-423), Online publication date: 1-Aug-1999. Blanc P, Aouifi A, Chiari P, Bouvier H, Jegaden O and Lehot J (1999) Chirurgie cardiaque mini-invasive: techniques chirurgicales et particularités anesthésiques, Annales Françaises d'Anesthésie et de Réanimation, 10.1016/S0750-7658(00)88454-3, 18:7, (748-771), Online publication date: 1-Aug-1999. Massetti M, Babatasi G, Nataf P, Bhoyroo S, Le Page O and Khayat A (1999) Minimally invasive internal thoracic artery harvest: the hybrid approach, The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 10.1016/S0003-4975(98)01253-3, 67:3, (632-634), Online publication date: 1-Mar-1999. Goldstein D and Oz M (1999) Current status and future directions of minimally invasive cardiac surgery, Current Opinion in Cardiology, 10.1097/00001573-199909000-00010, 14:5, (419), Online publication date: 1-Sep-1999. Massetti M, Babatasi G, Lotti A, Bhoyroo S, Le Page O and Khayat A (1998) Less invasive cardiac operations through a median sternotomy: 100 consecutive cases, The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 10.1016/S0003-4975(98)00732-2, 66:3, (1050-1054), Online publication date: 1-Sep-1998. Scheld H and Schmid C (1998) Cardiac surgery without the use of cardiopulmonary bypass: the challenges, Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology, 10.1097/00001503-199802000-00002, 11:1, (5-8), Online publication date: 1-Feb-1998. Waldenberger F, Haisjackl M, Lengsfeld M, Holinski S and Konertz W (1998) Koronarchirurgie am schlagenden Herzen während mechanischer Linksherzassistenz (SUPPCAB)Coronary surgery on a beating heart during mechanical left cardiac assist device support (SUPPCAB), European Surgery, 10.1007/BF02619843, 30:1, (16-19), Online publication date: 1-Jan-1998. Borst C, Santamore W, Smedira N and Bredée J (1997) Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting: On the beating heart and via limited access, The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 10.1016/S0003-4975(97)00437-2, 63:6, (S1-S5), Online publication date: 1-Jun-1997. Elefteriades J (1997) The “pro” point of view, Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia, 10.1016/S1053-0770(97)90023-9, 11:5, (661-668), Online publication date: 1-Aug-1997. November 15, 1996Vol 94, Issue 10 Advertisement Article InformationMetrics Copyright © 1996 by American Heart Associationhttps://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.94.10.2669 Originally publishedNovember 15, 1996 Keywordscoronary diseasesurgeryAHA Medical/Scientific Statementscardiopulmonary bypassangioplasty Advertisement