Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass Research Articles

Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Surgical Technique.

In recent years, there has been a growing interest in robotic-assisted coronary artery revascularization in Europe. Two different types of surgery can be performed using a robotic platform: RA-MIDCAB, in which the mammary artery is harvested endoscopically with robotic assistance and off-pump bypass graft is achieved under direct vision through mini thoracotomy, and TE-CAB, completely robotically performed. We started the robotic cardiac surgery program for mitral valve disease in our hospital, Humanitas Gavazzeni (Bergamo, Italy), in 2019; and in 2021, we addressed our experience with RA-MIDCAB. After a learning curve period, we have developed our technique to optimize the benefits offered by the robotic platform, tailoring strategy to individual patients, based on preoperative radiological images.

Hybrid total arterial minimally invasive off-pump coronary revascularization and percutaneous coronary intervention strategy for multivessel coronary artery disease: a cohort study with a median 11-year follow-up.

Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) is a treatment approach that combines the benefits of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) techniques such as minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) or minimally invasive multivessel CABG (MICS-CABG) with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for carefully selected patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MV CAD). The extant body of research primarily concentrates on the comparison of outcomes between HCR and CABG or PCI. Furthermore, HCR is defined primarily as MIDCAB and PCI. Given the various criteria for HCR identified in the current body of literature, as well as several hybrid revascularization techniques, our primary goal was to analyse the characteristics and track the development of HCR patients operated on in our centre (Robert Bosch Hospital) over both short and long periods of time. Additionally, we sought to validate the practical challenges that arise during the implementation of an HCR methodology. This cohort study included 138 patients with MV CAD who had an HCR approach in conjunction with isolated total arterial off-pump MICS-CABG or MIDCAB between 2007 and 2018 at Robert Bosch Hospital in Stuttgart. Data on major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (MACCE), defined as all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization and stroke were gathered through a questionnaire. Long-term follow-up, with a mean duration of 8.7±0.3 years and a median duration of 11 years, was available for a significant majority of the patients (92.8%, n=128). The average age was 69.6±11.2 years, with 79% being male. The mean European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation score I additive (EuroSCORE I) additive was 7.6±10.2 and the mean SYNergy between PCI with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) Score I was 22.9±9.4. A total of 97 MIDCAB surgeries and 41 MICS-CABG procedures were performed without any instances of conversion to sternotomy or cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). A total of 70 patients, or 50.7% of the sample, received the planned PCI treatment. This percentage was substantially lower in the subgroup with chronic CAD, with just 27, equivalent to 39.1%. The observed 30-day death rate was 2.1% (3/138). During follow-up, 3 myocardial infarctions, 18 PCI repeats, no CABG, and 4 strokes occurred. From 128 followed-up patients, 28 died (21.9%), 7 of which were heart deaths (5.5%). Total MACCE was 36.7%. The survival rates at 3 and 5 years were 92% and 85% respectively. Patients who didn't get the planned PCI had a mean survival rate of 6.8-9.1 years, while those with completed hybrid treatment had a higher mean survival rate of 8.4-10.2 years. In selected individuals with MVCAD, current evidence suggests that HCR is a safe and effective coronary artery revascularization approach. After coronary bypass surgery, the attention going forward needs to be devoted toward the organization of the PCI step in the treatment process.

Comparing clinical outcomes of hybrid coronary revascularization with open coronary artery bypass in patients with multi-vessels lesions.

Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) involves the use of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) to treat the left anterior descending artery (LAD), and percutaneous coronary intervention to treat non-LAD vessels. We reported the results of a comparative analysis between HCR and off-pump CABG via sternotomy (OPCABG). Data were retrospectively collated from patients who underwent HCR or OPCABG for multivessel coronary artery disease between 2011 and 2022. Propensity score-based matching was performed to reduce the selection bias. The Comparisons of cardiac-related death, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), and repeat revascularization were performed by Kaplan-Meier analysis or the Fine-Gray test. After matching, the baseline characteristics were well-balanced between the two groups with 91 patients per group. There was no significant difference in operative mortality rate (1.1% for HCR vs2.2% for OPCABG, p = 1.000). However, patients undergoing HCR required a significantly lower rate of blood product transfusions (p < .001) and experienced significantly fewer pulmonary complications than OPCABG patients (p < .001). At 10 years, the incidences of cardiac-related death, MACCE and repeat revascularization did not differ significantly between the two groups (9.5% vs11.5%, p = .277; 4.7% vs12.3%, p = .361; 1.2% vs2.5%, p = .914, respectively). For patients with multi-vessel lesions, HCR was comparable to OPCABG in long-term outcomes such as cardiac-related death, MACCE, and the durability of grafts. Additionally, HCR was better than OPCABG in perioperative outcomes. HCR may be an alternative therapy for OPCABG in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease.

Robot-Assisted MIDCAB Using Bilateral Internal Thoracic Artery: A Propensity Score–Matched Study With OPCAB Patients

Objective: Robot-assisted minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (RA-MIDCAB) is an attractive strategy for coronary revascularization. Growing evidence supports the use of total arterial grafting in coronary surgery. We evaluated total arterial left-sided coronary revascularization with bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) using RA-MIDCAB and compared it with a propensity score–matched (PSM) off-pump CAB (OPCAB) surgery population. Methods: We retrospectively included all isolated OPCAB and RA-MIDCAB surgery using BITA without saphenous vein graft from January 1, 2015, to October 31, 2022. We analyzed all our RA-MIDCAB patients and performed PSM to compare them with our OPCAB population. Primary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and mortality. Secondary outcomes were surgical parameters, length of hospital stay, and learning curve. Results: We included 601 OPCAB and 77 RA-MIDCAB procedures, which resulted in 2 cohorts of 54 patients after PSM. Mortality and MACCE survival analysis showed no significant difference. There was less blood transfusion in the RA-MIDCAB (16.7%) compared with the OPCAB group (38.9%; P = 0.02). We observed fewer intensive care unit (ICU) admissions (24.1% vs 96.6%), shorter ICU stay (0.78 ± 1.7 vs 1.91 ± 1.01 days), and shorter hospital stay (6.78 ± 2.4 vs 8.01 ± 2.5 days) in the RA-MIDCAB versus OPCAB group ( P &lt; 0.01). Surgery time decreased from 400.0 ± 70.8 to 325.0 ± 38.0 min with more experience in RA-MIDCAB BITA harvesting ( P &lt; 0.01). Conclusions: This is a first publication of 77 consecutive RA-MIDCAB BITA harvesting for left coronary artery system revascularization. This technique is safe in terms of MACCE and mortality. Additional advantages are shorter length of hospital stay, fewer ICU admissions, and less blood transfusion.

Early and late outcomes after minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass vs. full sternotomy off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.

Minimally-invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) is a less-invasive alternative to full sternotomy off-pump coronary artery bypass (FS-OPCAB) revascularization of the left anterior descending artery (LAD). Some studies suggested that MIDCAB is associated with a greater risk of graft occlusion and repeat revascularization than FS-OPCAB LIMA-to-LAD grafting. Data comparing MIDCAB to FS-OPCAB with regard to long-term follow-up is scarce. We compared short- and long-term results of MIDCAB vs. FS-OPCAB revascularization over a maximum follow-up period of 10 years. From December 2009 to June 2020, 388 elective patients were included in our retrospective study. 229 underwent MIDCAB, and 159 underwent FS-OPCAB LIMA-to-LAD grafting. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for selection bias and to estimate treatment effects on short- and long-term outcomes. IPTW-adjusted Kaplan-Meier estimates by study group were calculated for all-cause mortality, stroke, the risk of repeat revascularization and myocardial infarction up to a maximum follow-up of 10 years. MIDCAB patients had less rethoracotomies (n = 13/3.6% vs. n = 30/8.0%, p = 0.012), fewer transfusions (0.93 units ± 1.83 vs. 1.61 units ± 2.52, p < 0.001), shorter mechanical ventilation time (7.6 ± 4.7 h vs. 12.1 ± 26.4 h, p = 0.005), and needed less hemofiltration (n = 0/0% vs. n = 8/2.4%, p = 0.004). Thirty-day mortality did not differ significantly between the two groups (n = 0/0% vs. n = 3/0.8%, p = 0.25). Long-term outcomes did not differ significantly between study groups. In the FS-OPCAB group, the probability of survival at 1, 5, and 10 years was 98.4%, 87.8%, and 71.7%, respectively. In the MIDCAB group, the corresponding values were 98.4%, 87.7%, and 68.7%, respectively (RR1.24, CI0.87-1.86, p = 0.7). In the FS group, the freedom from stroke at 1, 5, and 10 years was 97.0%, 93.0%, and 93.0%, respectively. In the MIDCAB group, the corresponding values were 98.5%, 96.9%, and 94.3%, respectively (RR0.52, CI0.25-1.09, p = 0.06). Freedom from repeat revascularization at 1, 5, and 10 years in the FS-OPCAB group was 92.2%, 84.7%, and 79.5%, respectively. In the MIDCAB group, the corresponding values were 94.8%, 90.2%, and 81.7%, respectively (RR0.73, CI0.47-1.16, p = 0.22). MIDCAB is a safe and efficacious technique and offers comparable long-term results regarding mortality, stroke, repeat revascularization, and freedom from myocardial infarction when compared to FS-OPCAB.

Right-sided minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass: Preoperative planning and surgical technique

Right-sided minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass: Preoperative planning and surgical technique

Thirteen Years of Impactful, Minimally Invasive Coronary Surgery: Short- and Long-Term Results for Single and Multi-Vessel Disease

Objectives: Minimally invasive coronary surgery (MICS) via lateral thoracotomy is a less invasive alternative to the traditional median full sternotomy approach for coronary surgery. This study investigates its effectiveness for short- and long-term revascularization in cases of single and multi-vessel diseases. Methods: A thorough examination was performed on the databases of two cardiac surgery programs, focusing on patients who underwent minimally invasive coronary bypass grafting procedures between 2010 and 2023. The study involved patients who underwent either minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting (MIDCAB) for the revascularization of left anterior descending (LAD) artery stenosis or minimally invasive multi-vessel coronary artery bypass grafting (MICSCABG). Our assessment criteria included in-hospital mortality, long-term mortality, and freedom from reoperations due to failed aortocoronary bypass grafts post-surgery. Additionally, we evaluated significant in-hospital complications as secondary endpoints. Results: A total of 315 consecutive patients were identified between 2010 and 2023 (MIDCAB 271 vs. MICSCABG 44). Conversion to median sternotomy (MS) occurred in eight patients (2.5%). The 30-day all-cause mortality was 1.3% (n = 4). Postoperative AF was the most common complication postoperatively (n = 26, 8.5%). Five patients were reoperated for bleeding (1.6%), and myocardial infarction (MI) happened in four patients (1.3%). The mean follow-up time was six years (±4 years). All-cause mortality was 10.3% (n = 30), with only five (1.7%) patients having a confirmed cardiac cause. The reoperation rate due to graft failure or the progression of aortocoronary disease was 1.4% (n = 4). Conclusions: Despite the complexity of the MICS approach, the results of our study support the safety and effectiveness of this procedure with low rates of mortality, morbidity, and conversion for both single and multi-vessel bypass surgeries. These results underscore further the necessity to implement such programs to benefit patients.

Efficacy of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block on analgesia and quality of recovery after minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass surgery: protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BackgroundMinimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) surgery offers an effective option for coronary artery disease (CAD) patients with the avoidance of median sternotomy and fast postoperative recovery. However, MIDCAB is still associated with significant postoperative pain which may lead to delayed recovery. The erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a superficial fascial plane block. There have not been randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of ESPB on analgesia and patient recovery following MIDCAB surgery. We therefore designed a double-blind prospective randomized placebo-controlled trial, aiming to prove the hypothesis that ESPB reduces postoperative pain scores in patients undergoing MIDCAB surgery.MethodsThe study protocol has been reviewed and approved by the Ethical Review Committee of Peking University People’s Hospital. Sixty adult patients of either sex scheduled for MIDCAB surgery under general anesthesia (GA) will be included. Patients will be randomly allocated to receive either a preoperative single-shot ESPB with 30 mL of ropivacaine 0.5% (ESPB group) or normal saline 0.9% (control group). The primary outcomes are the difference between the two groups in numeric rating scale (NRS) scores at rest at different time points (6, 12, 18, 24, 48 h) after surgery. The secondary outcomes include NRS scores on deep inspiration within 48 h, postoperative hydromorphone consumption, and quality of patient recovery at 24 h and 48 h, using the Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) scale. The other outcomes include intraoperative fentanyl requirements, the need for additional postoperative rescue analgesics, time to tracheal extubation and chest tube removal after surgery, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD), intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), hospital discharge time, and 30-day mortality. Adverse events will be also evaluated.DiscussionThis is a novel randomized controlled study evaluating a preoperative ultrasound-guided single-shot unilateral ESPB on analgesia and quality of patient recovery in MIDCAB surgery. The results of this study will characterize the degree of acute postoperative pain and clinical outcomes following MIDCAB. Our study may help optimizing analgesia regimen selection and improving patient comfort in this specific population.Trial registrationThe study was prospectively registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (trial identifier: ChiCTR2100052810). Date of registration: November 5, 2021.

His bundle pacing in a patient with atrioventricular conduction abnormalities, persistent atrial flutter at high thromboembolic and bleeding risk after hybrid coronary revascularization and left atrial appendage closure - case report

We present a case of a 78-year-old patient with persistent atrial &amp;#64258; utter, history of atrial &amp;#64257; brillation and atrioventricular conduction disturbances, including &amp;#64257; rst-degree atrioventricular block (AVB) and paroxysmal complete AVB. Echocardiography revealed mildly reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF, 44%). The patient had high thromboembolic risk, had previous ischemic stroke, suffered from chronic coronary artery disease treated with hybrid coronary revascularization (minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting and subsequent percutaneous coronary intervention) as well as left atrial appendage closure. Because of high bleeding risk, double antiplatelet therapy (acetylsalicylic acid and clopidogrel) combined with low dose of low-molecular-weight heparin after cardiac surgery were introduced. Due to persistent atrial &amp;#64258; utter, complete AVB, lack of intraventricular conduction abnormalities, mildly reduced LVEF and expected high right ventricle pacing burden, the patient was referred for dual-chamber pacemaker implantation using conduction system pacing (CSP), preferentially His bundle pacing (HBP). The procedure was performed with good outcome and CSP was utilized via HBP. After reassessment of thromboembolic and bleeding risk, the patient was discharged home on reduced dose of dabigatran. Short-term follow-up showed stable HBP parameters along with no additional symptoms. Despite good short-term outcomes and no complications in studied patient, large randomized controlled trials are needed to verify long-term safety and ef&amp;#64257; cacy of HBP to optimize clinical care of patients with atrioventricular conduction abnormalities using a personalized approach.&amp;nbsp;

REASONABLE INCOMPLETE REVASCULARIZATION USING MINIMALLY INVASIVE CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFTING TECHNIQUES

HighlightsIn multivessel coronary artery disease coronary artery bypass grafting under cardiopulmonary bypass using the internal thoracic artery is the accepted standard of revascularization, however, it is characterized by high trauma. Minimally invasive techniques offset this disadvantage but cannot always provide complete revascularization. Determination of feasibility and combined use of incomplete revascularization with minimally invasive techniques of coronary artery bypass may be a worthy alternative to traditional coronary bypass in a certain group of patients. At the same time, literature the data are ambiguous and deficient in the world. Aim. To justify the use of minimally invasive coronary artery bypass technique in incomplete myocardial revascularization in patients with stable ischemic heart disease from the standpoint of efficacy and safety.Methods. The retrospective study focuses on the analysis of minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting and off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery using sternotomy) and traditional CABG with cardiopulmonary bypass in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (n = 429) performed in the period from 2013 to 2017. Depending on the CABG technique and the type of revascularization (complete/incomplete), all patients were divided into 3 groups with two comparison subgroups in each. The completeness of revascularization was assessed using the residual SYNTAX score (rSS). The SYNTAX revascularization index (SRI) was calculated using the following formula: SRI = [1 – (rSS/bSS)] × 100. Subsequently, a two-stage (short- and long-term) analysis of the adverse events frequency was carried out.Results. The minimally invasive incomplete revascularization (IR) group and the traditional complete revascularization (CR) group. The rSS in the IR group was 3.0 [2.0; 5.0] compared with the group without traditional CABG, whereas the SRI was 84.31 [75.00; 89.19] % compared with 100.00 [100.00; 100.00] %, respectively (p&lt;0.001). The analysis of in-hospital period did not reveal significant differences in the number of primary and secondary endpoints. Taking into account the additional endpoints, the IR group had a lower level of intraoperative blood loss – 300 [200; 310] mL compared with 500 [400; 500] mL in the CR group (p&lt;0.001). Moreover, the need for blood transfusion was significantly lower – by 4.27 times (95% CI: 0.124–0.441, p&lt;0.001). The length of patients stay with IR in the intensive care unit was 4.12 times shorter (95% CI: 1,954–8,994, p&lt;0.001). The 1-year follow-up visit revealed full comparability between the groups in terms of frequency of both primary and secondary endpoints. There were no differences in freedom from MACCE and mortality.The minimally invasive CR group and the traditional CR group. The in-hospital period and 1-year follow-up visits showed similar outcomes, comparable to the minimally invasive IR and traditional CR groups. The minimally invasive IR group and the minimally invasive CR group. The analysis of in-hospital period and 1-year follow-up visits did not reveal any differences in endpoints. Freedom from MACСE and death was similar as well.Conclusion. The data obtained indicate a similar safety profile and effectiveness of IR. Minimally invasive IR is appropriate with rSS ≤3 and SRI ≥84.3% and can be considered as an alternative approach to myocardial revascularization in patients for whom traditional CABG is undesirable.

Comparison of Robot-Assisted Multivessel Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass and Hybrid Revascularization

BackgroundThis study compares 2 minimally invasive coronary revascularization approaches: robot-assisted multivessel minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) and the hybrid approach combining MIDCAB with subsequent percutaneous coronary intervention. MethodsA retrospective review was conducted on cases of robotic MIDCAB performed at our institution between 2012 and 2022. Two groups of patients were analyzed: the surgery group (undergoing robotic multivessel MIDCAB) and the hybrid group. Surgical procedures included robotic left internal mammary artery harvest and anastomosis, with percutaneous coronary intervention performed within 30 days in the hybrid group. ResultsThere were 105 patients in the surgery group and 81 patients in the hybrid group. Both groups had similar characteristics, except that the surgery group had older patients. There were no mortalities in either group. Postoperative atrial fibrillation rates were higher in the surgery group. Length of stay and other postoperative complications did not differ significantly between the groups. ConclusionsMultivessel robotic MIDCAB can be safely performed with comparable outcomes to the hybrid approach. The hybrid technique, being less demanding, is the preferred in most centers. However, multivessel robotic MIDCAB offers the advantage of complete revascularization and potentially more durable results. Patients with complex non–left anterior descending lesions may not be suitable for the hybrid approach.

Long-term follow-up of patients with complex coronary artery disease treated with minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass.

Patients with complex coronary artery disease (CAD) may benefit from surgical myocardial revascularization but weighing the risk of peri-operative complications against the expected merit is difficult. Minimally invasive direct artery bypass (MIDCAB) procedures are less invasive, provide the prognostic advantage of operative revascularization of the left anterior descending artery and may be integrated in hybrid strategies. Herein, the outcomes between patients with coronary 1-vessel disease (1-VD) and patients with 2-VD and 3-VD after MIDCAB procedures were compared in this single-center study. Between 1998 and 2018, 1363 patients underwent MIDCAB at the documented institution. 628 (46.1%) patients had 1-VD, 434 (31.9%) patients 2-VD and 300 (22.0%) patients suffered from 3-VD. Data of patients with 2-VD, and 3-VD were pooled as multi-VD (MVD). Patients with MVD were older (66.2 ± 10.9 vs. 62.9 ± 11.2 years; p < 0.001) and presented with a higher EuroScore II (2.10 [0.4; 34.2] vs. 1.2 [0.4; 12.1]; p < 0.001). Procedure time was longer in MVD patients (131.1 ± 50.3 min vs. 122.2 ± 34.5 min; p < 0.001). Post-operatively, MVD patients had a higher stroke rate (17 [2.3%] vs. 4 [0.6%]; p = 0.014). No difference in 30-day mortality was observed (12 [1.6%] vs. 4 [0.6%]; p = 0.128). Survival after 15 years was significantly lower in MVD patients (p < 0.01). Hybrid procedures were planned in 295 (40.2%) patients with MVD and realized in 183 (61.2%) cases. MVD patients with incomplete hybrid procedures had a significantly decreased long-term survival compared to cases with complete revascularization (p < 0.01). Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass procedures are low-risk surgical procedures. If hybrid procedures have been planned, completion of revascularization should be a major goal.

Combining Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting with Transapical Aortic Valve Implantation-The Next Level Heart Team Approach.

For patients presenting with aortic stenosis and coronary artery disease, a simultaneous procedure addressing both diseases is recommended to reduce operative risk. In high-risk patients with hostile femoral or coronary axis, taTAVI-MIDCAB can be an alternative minimally invasive approach, offering the benefits of left interior mammary artery to left anterior descending coronary artery (LIMA-LAD) grafting. From 2014 to 2022, 10 patients underwent taTAVI-MIDCAB for combined coronary and severe aortic stenosis in the hybrid operation theater at our institution. We assessed perioperative outcomes and follow-up outcomes. The median age was 83 years (81 to 86). The procedure was successfully performed in all patients without conversion to sternotomy. The median length of hospital and intensive care unit stay was 9 days (7 to 16) and 2.5 days (1 to 5), respectively. The median flow over the coronary artery bypass was 31 (22 to 44) mL/min, with a pulsatility index (PI) of 2.4 (2.1 to 3.2). Mild paravalvular leak occurred in 2 patients (10%). There were no neurological events nor acute kidney injury. Pacemaker implantation was required in 1 patient (10%). Simultaneous surgical coronary revascularization and interventional valve implantation in the setting of a hostile femoral and coronary axis appears to be safe and beneficial.

Optimal Management of Patients Treated With Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass in the Era of Enhanced Recovery After Cardiac Surgery

Optimal Management of Patients Treated With Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass in the Era of Enhanced Recovery After Cardiac Surgery

Assessing the Learning Curve of the Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery By-pass Technique

Assessing the Learning Curve of the Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery By-pass Technique

Minimally Invasive Off-Pump Anaortic Complete Arterial Coronary Artery Bypass: How to Do It?

Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass has empowered coronary artery bypass grafting to compete with the appeal of percutaneous coronary procedures. Successful results of off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery and without touching the aorta have facilitated the development and use of minimally invasive methods. Multivessel coronary bypass surgery performed using a minimally invasive method through a small thoracotomy in the left chest with off-pump, anaortic, and all-arterial grafts is described step by step. Technical considerations, description of operation stages, and tips and pitfalls will be examined. A 64-year-old male patient with no known comorbidities except smoking revealed 3 vessels and a side vessel disease, and the heart team decided on surgical revascularization with a low-risk procedure. Experienced surgeons may perform this operation successfully, and the development of efficient simulation systems will increase its use.

Transapical Transcatheter Mitral Valve Implantation with the Tendyne Valve: The Swiss Experience.

The aim of this study was to report outcomes of all patients undergoing transcatheter mitral valve implantation with the Tendyne Mitral Valve System (Tendyne) in Switzerland. We retrospectively analyzed preoperative echocardiographic and computed tomography (CT) data, procedural findings, and 30-day and 1-year follow-up echocardiographic and clinical data of patients who underwent transcatheter mitral valve implantation with Tendyne in Switzerland. A total of 24 patients (age, 74.8 ± 7.8 years; 67% male) underwent transapical transcatheter mitral valve implantation with Tendyne between June 2020 and October 2022. Technical success rate was 96%. In five patients, concomitant interventions in the form of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (one patient), minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (one patient), and transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (three patients) were performed prior to or after the index procedure. There was one device embolization, and two patients required valve retrieval. In-hospital outcomes included one stroke and three major bleeding events. None of the patients died within 30 days. Two patients were rehospitalized for decompensated heart failure. At 1-year follow-up, there were three noncardiovascular-related deaths. Transcatheter mitral valve implantation with Tendyne is feasible to treat polymorbid patients suffering from complex mitral valve disease as well as patients with previous mitral interventions. Perioperative risk was acceptable and procedural success high.

Right-Sided Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass: Clinical Experience and Perspectives.

Objective: Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting (MIDCAB) using the left internal thoracic artery to the left descending artery is a clinical routine in the treatment of coronary artery disease. Far less is known on right-sided MIDCAB (r-MIDCAB) using the right internal thoracic artery (RITA) to the right coronary artery (RCA). We aimed to present our experience in patients with complex coronary artery disease who underwent r-MIDCAB. Materials and Methods: Between October 2019 and January 2023, 11 patients received r-MIDCAB using RITA to RCA bypass in a minimally invasive technique via right anterior minithoracotomy without using a cardiopulmonary bypass. Underlying coronary disease was complex right coronary artery stenosis (n = 7) and anomalous right coronary artery (ARCA; n = 4). All procedure-related and outcome data were evaluated prospectively. Results: Successful minimally invasive revascularization was achieved in all patients (n = 11). There were no conversions to sternotomy and no re-explorations for bleeding. Furthermore, no myocardial infarction, no strokes, and, most importantly, no deaths were observed. During the follow-up period (median 24 months), all patients were alive and 90% were completely angina free. Two patients received a repeated revascularization after surgery but independently from the RITA-RCA bypass, which was fully competent in both patients. Conclusion: Right-sided MIDCAB can be performed safely and effectively in patients with expected technically challenging percutaneous coronary intervention of the RCA and in patients with ARCA. Mid-term results showed high freedom from angina in nearly all patients. Further studies with larger patient cohorts and more evidence are needed to provide the best revascularization strategy for patients suffering from isolated complex RCA stenosis and ARCA.

Five-Year Survival of Patients Treated with Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass (MIDCAB) Compared with the General Swiss Population.

To evaluate the midterm follow-up and 5-year survival outcome of the minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) procedure compared with the survival of the general Swiss population. Retrospective study on preoperative data, intraoperative data, and postoperative outcome of patients who underwent MIDCAB surgery between June 2010 and February 2019. To assess validity of this surgical therapy, outcomes were compared with survival data of a gender- and age-matched cohort of the general Swiss population taken from the database of the Swiss Federal Statistical Office. A total of 88 patients were included. Median (interquartile range [IQR[) age was 66 (56-75) years, and 27% (n = 24) were female. The median (IQR) length of the in-hospital stay was 7 (6-8) days. No postoperative stroke occurred. The 30-day mortality was 1.1% (n = 1). Reintervention for failed left internal mammary artery was needed in 1.1% (n = 1). The median (IQR) ejection fraction was 58% (47-60) preoperatively and remained stable during follow-up. The median (IQR) follow-up period was 3 (1.1-5.2) years. Five years postoperatively, 83% (confidence interval, 69-91) of the patients were alive, showing an overlap with the range of survival of the matched subcohort of the general Swiss population (range, 84-100%). Though suffering from coronary heart disease, patients after MIDCAB show almost equal survival rates as an equivalent subcohort corresponding to the general Swiss population matched on age and gender. Thus, our data show this treatment to be safe and beneficial.

Predictors and outcomes of conversion to sternotomy in minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting.

This study aims to investigate the risk factors and surgical outcomes of conversion to median sternotomy in minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting. Between January 2017 and July 2022, a total of 274 patients (246 males, 28 females; mean age: 57.0±9.6 years; range, 33 to 81 years) who underwent conventional (n=116) or robot-assisted (n=158) minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting were retrospectively analyzed. The primary outcome measure of the study was conversion to median sternotomy, and the secondary outcome measures were operative mortality, length of intensive care unit and hospital stay. Conversion to median sternotomy was required in 26 (9.5%) patients. The most common cause of conversion was intramyocardial left anterior descending artery (27.0%). Among preoperative and operative characteristics, only age was statistically significant risk factor for conversion to sternotomy (odds ratio=1.06, p=0.01). Operative mortality occurred in one patient (0.36%) patient in the entire cohort. The length of intensive care unit and hospital stay was significantly longer in patients requiring conversion to median sternotomy (p=0.002 and p<0.001, respectively). There was no significant difference in other postoperative outcomes between the two groups (p>0.05). Intramyocardial left anterior descending artery is the most common reason for conversion to sternotomy, and older age increases the risk of conversion. Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting can be performed with satisfactory results, even if it requires conversion to sternotomy.