Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass Group Research Articles

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.

Early and long-term clinical outcomes after minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting versus off-pump coronary surgery via sternotomy in isolated proximal left anterior descending artery disease: A propensity score matching analysis.

This study was designed to compare short-term and long-term clinical outcomes of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) and off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB) via median sternotomy in patients with single-vessel left anterior descending (LAD) arterydisease. In this retrospective study, 194-patients met the inclusion criteria and were divided into the MIDCAB group (n = 111) and OPCAB via median sternotomy group (n = 83). Short-term outcomes included: in-hospital mortality, perioperative myocardial infarction (MI), perioperative cerebrovascular adverse events (CAEs), chest drainage, reoperation for bleeding, duration of surgery, ventilation time, deep wound infection, packed red blood cell (pRBC) transfusion and duration of hospital stay. The long-term outcomes included: all-cause mortality, the incidence of MI and stroke, target vessel revascularization (TVR) and composite of mortality/MI/stroke. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match patients between the groups. Before as well as after the PSM, no significant differences were observed between both groups in terms of in-hospital mortality, incidence of perioperative MI, incidence of CAEs, reoperation for bleeding, pRBC transfusions, deep wound infection and ventilation time. However, MIDCAB group had lower chest tube drainage and shorter hospital stay. On the other hand, OPCAB group had shorter time of surgery before as well as after PS matching. At 7-years, before and after PSM, freedom from all-cause mortality, MI, stroke, TVR as well as composite of mortality/MI/stroke were comparable between both groups. Short-term as well as long-term outcomes of MIDCAB in terms of mortality, MI, stroke, and target vessel revascularization are satisfactory and as safe and effective as OPCAB via sternotomy.

Very Long-term Outcome of Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass

Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) is a well-established, low-impact surgical procedure for revascularization of the left descending coronary artery with the left internal mammary artery. This study aimed to evaluate safety, overall survival, and freedom from major adverse cardiocerebral-related events (MACCE) after 20 years of MIDCAB. This study retrospectively collected a series of 141 patients who underwent MIDCAB between 1997 and 2017, to assess long-term outcome. A total of 133 patients who underwent revascularization of the left descending coronary artery with the left mammary artery through a full median sternotomy were analyzed. Actuarial survival rates on a Kaplan-Meier curve were 100%, 95%, 90%, 83%, and 70% at 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20 years, respectively. Freedom from MACCE, defined as myocardial infarction, stroke, and cardiac death, was 97%, 90%, 79%, 75%, and 61% at 1,5,10,15, and 20 years, respectively. At Cox multivariable analysis, age, cancer, and chronic renal insufficiency were found to be independent predictors affecting long-term survival, with a hazard ratio of 1.12 (P= .007), 17.63 (P < .001), and 5.16 (P= .03), respectively. The MIDCAB group showed a significantly shorter hospital length of stay and significantly lower rates of blood transfusions, cardiac-related events, and all-cause events compared with the full sternotomy group (P= .02 and P= .001, respectively). The very long-term clinical outcome of MIDCAB is satisfactory in terms of survival and freedom from MACCE. MIDCAB significantly reduces hospital length of stay and blood transfusions when compared with full sternotomy bypass surgery on the left descending coronary artery and appears to improve prognosis in terms of cardiac-related events and all-cause events effectively.

Comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention using bioresorbable vascular scaffold and minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass for left anterior descending artery disease: 3-year clinical outcomes

Aim. Evaluates 3-year clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) versus minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) surgery for the treatment of left anterior descending (LAD) lesions.Methods. In this single-center study were included 130 patients with stable angina and significant (≥70%) LAD disease. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to PCI with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold (Absorb) (n = 65) or MIDCAB (n = 65). The primary end-point was major adverse cerebrocardiovascular events (MACCE) and secondary was. Primary and secondary endpoints were, respectively, major adverse cerebro-cardiovascular events (MACCE) and target vessel failure at 3-year.Results.The groups of patients were comparable for all baseline demographic, clinical and angiographic parameters. The primary composite endpoint of MACCE through 3 years occurred in 16.9% of BVS patients and 9.2% of MIDCAB patients (p = 0.19). But 3-year any revascularization rates were higher with BVS (13.8% vs. 3.1%; p = 0.027). TVF was favor of the MIDCAB group (12,3% vs. 3,1%, p = 0.04), mainly triggered by high subsequent need for revascularization of the targeted vessel in the BVS group (9.2% vs. 1.5%; p = 0.05).Conclusion. At 3-year follow-up, PCI by BVS and MIDCAB in in patients with isolated LAD lesions yielded similar long-term outcomes regarding the primary composite clinical endpoint. The bioresorbable scaffold was associated with a higher incidence of reinterventions, TVF and TVR than the MIDCAB through 3 years of follow-up.

MIDCAB versus off-pump CABG: Comparative study

To investigate the clinical significance of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB). Three hundred patients admitted to the Second Hospital of Shandong University from March 2006 to February 2010 were retrospectively analyzed and received off-pump operation under general anesthesia. Depending on surgical methods, patients were divided into the MIDCAB group (n=90) and the median sternotomy off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) group, named as the OPCAB group (n=210). Preoperative clinical data, perioperative clinical data, and mid-term follow-up at 7years after operation were analyzed and compared between the two groups. Age and the number of vascular lesions in the OPCAB group were higher than those in the MIDCAB group, whereas left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in the former was lower than that in the latter (p<0.05). The number of distal anastomotic stomas, operation time, blood transfusion volume, postoperative cardiac troponin I (cTnI) peak value, ventilator use time, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and hospital stay in the MIDCAB group were significantly lower than those in the traditional OPCAB group (p<0.05). Among the 294 recovered cases, 201 cases completed 7years of continuous follow-up, with a follow-up rate of 67.91%. The LVEF and the patency rate of vessels in the MIDCAB group were higher than those in the OPCAB group (p<0.05). Compared with the median sternotomy OPCAB, MIDCAB is characterized by small incision, small trauma, positive efficacy, and safety; therefore, it is worthy of being promoted.

Clinical Effect and Prognosis of Off-Pump Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass.

BackgroundCoronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is a common procedure to circumvent the obstruction of coronary arteries when stents are unsuitable. CABG is a very traumatic surgery that requires redirecting blood flow to an external pump. Thus, this procedure has many risks during and after surgery, and minimizing these risks would greatly benefit the patients.Material/MethodsWe selected 126 patients with coronary artery syndrome and who were unsuitable for stent percutaneous coronary intervention. The observation group received minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB), while the control group was treated with off-pump CABG.ResultsBlood markers and echocardiography before and after treatment improved equally in both groups. Neither group exhibited obvious adverse reactions, or liver and kidney function damage. However, surgical bleeding and postoperative observation days were significantly reduced in the MIDCAB group. Death and cardiac shock at the end of follow-up were significantly lower in the MIDCAB group.ConclusionsOverall, the clinical benefits of MIDCAB and OP-CABG were similar, but MIDCAB significantly reduced postoperative hospital stay and intraoperative blood transfusion, and improved clinical prognosis.

Hybrid revascularization in multivessel coronary artery disease†

Minimally invasive hybrid revascularization (MIHR) by means of the left mammary artery on the left anterior descending artery [minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB)] combined with percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) stenting may be an alternative to conventional coronary artery bypass grafting through sternotomy or multiple PCI. The purpose of this study is to retrospectively evaluate the long-term outcomes of this strategy. Since May 1997 up to January 2011, 810 MIDCAB have been performed as isolated revascularization in 644 patients. Since 2004, MIDCAB, as a part of hybrid revascularization, was associated with PCI in 166 patients. In the MIDCAB group, mean age was 64.6 ± 12.0, with 83.8% males. Two-vessel disease was 62.4%, three-vessel disease 37.6%. Overall mortality was 0.24%, perioperative acute myocardial infarction-1.6%, early reoperation-0.74%, reopening for bleeding-1.2%, case rate of haemotrasfusion-3.1%, with a mean hospital postoperative stay of 4 ± 2.5 days. Postoperative angiographic control prior to PCI and in symptomatic patients showed patent left internal mammary artery in 100% of cases. PCI was performed in 166 patients, 64.2% before MIDCAB and 35.8% after surgery (interval 2.2 ± 1.3 months). The mean follow-up in the MIDCAB group was 8.4 ± 3.2 years. In the MIHR group, at the mean follow-up of 4.5 ± 2.3 years, freedom from related cardiac death was 93% with freedom from cardiac reintervention of 83%. Our 13-year experience with MIDCAB demonstrates that the operation is safe and associated with a very low incidence of early and late complications. The hybrid approach provided excellent long-term outcome in terms of freedom from cardiac death and reoperation. Accurate patient selection, as well the timing of the hybrid procedure, is mandatory to optimize surgical and PCI results.

Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass as a Primary Strategy for Reoperative Myocardial Revascularization

: Conventional reoperative coronary artery bypass grafting is associated with risk of sternal re-entry, injury to patent grafts, and embolization from diseased grafts. Sternal sparing minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) avoids such risks in cases where it is technically feasible. We sought to examine in-hospital outcomes of reoperative MIDCAB surgery. : We recorded prospective standardized data from the New York Cardiac Surgical Reporting System database of 369 reoperative MIDCAB cases from 1996 to 2006 and compared with 822 primary MIDCAB patients in the same time period. We compared the preoperative risk profile and postoperative in-hospital outcomes and length of stay for both groups. : There was a significantly higher risk profile typical of the reoperative patient population (P < 0.001 for stroke, peripheral/cerebrovascular disease, extensive aortic calcification, renal failure, and left ventricular ejection fraction <40%) compared with the primary MIDCAB group. Despite this fact, there was no difference in the in-hospital outcomes and length of hospital stay between the two groups. : Reoperative MIDCAB provides targeted coronary revascularization and avoids hazards of sternal re-entry, graft injury and manipulation, and deleterious effects of cardiopulmonary bypass. This hastens recovery and provides excellent early outcomes equivalent to primary MIDCAB procedures.

Comparison of Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery with Implantation of Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients with Left Anterior Descending Coronary Artery Disease

: Bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary interventions improve the clinical status of patients with left anterior descending coronary artery disease. However, these techniques differ in invasiveness and in the need for subsequent reinterventions. The development of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) surgery and of drug-eluting stents (DES) offers perspectives to close this gap. : We compared the long-term clinical outcome of 308 patients after revascularization for isolated left anterior descending coronary artery disease. One hundred fifty-four patients were treated with MIDCAB and 154 with percutaneous coronary interventions and DES implantation. : Both groups were similar in age (63 ± 13 and 62 ± 10 years), Euroscore (3.3 ± 2.8 and 3.4 ± 2.6), and mean duration of follow-up (30 ± 17 and 24 ± 10 months). Two-year survival was similar after MIDCAB and after DES (97.4% and 94.8%). During follow-up, four patients (2.6%) of the MIDCAB group and 21 patients (13.6%) of the DES group needed subsequent revascularization of the target vessel (P = 0.001). Revascularization of a nontarget vessel was needed in 11 patients (7%) of the MIDCAB group and in 17 patients (11%) of the DES group (NS). Neurologic complications included two transient ischemic accidents and two strokes in the MIDCAB group but three fatal cerebral hemorrhages and one stroke in the DES group. Major adverse coronary and cerebrovascular events rates were 14% in the MIDCAB and 31% in the DES group. : MIDCAB and DES implantation showed similar rates of mortality but a higher reintervention rate after DES. Anticoagulation implications remain critical for the future of DES.

Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent implantation vs. minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) in patients with left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis

The aim of this study was to assess the effects of percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (DESs) versus minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) surgery in the management of patients with proximal left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery stenosis. Until recent years, despite the advantages of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) with bare metal stent implantation, such as shorter hospital stays and recovery time, MIDCAB showed better results with regard to the need for repeated intervention in the target vessel than PTCA with proximal LAD lesions. Symptomatic patients (n = 189) were randomly assigned to DES group (n = 119) and MIDCAB group (n = 70). Patients with an isolated high-grade lesion (stenosis of > or = 70% of the luminal diameter) in the proximal LAD coronary artery (from the ostium to the first diagonal branch) were included in this study. During the 6-month follow-up period, 1.7% (n = 2) in the DES group needed repeated revascularization procedures for target lesion revascularization compared with 5.9% (n = 4) in the MIDCAB group (P = 0.196). The rates of death and myocardial infarction were similar in both groups [DES 0.0% (n = 0) vs. MIDCAB 2.9% (n = 2), P = 0.135; DES 1.7% (n = 2) vs. MIDCAB 2.9% (n = 2), P = 0.627; respectively] during 6 months of follow-up. In-hospital length of stay was significantly shorter in the DES group compared with the MIDCAB group (5.8 +/- 2.1 days vs. 8.9 +/- 2.6 days; P = 0.001). DES implantation and MIDCAB surgery showed similar rates of myocardial infarction, the need for repeated revascularization, and death during 6 months of follow-up. However, DES implantation resulted in lower average number of hospital stays and similar postoperative complications.

Beating heart coronary artery bypass grafting: results from 402 patients and the usefulness of gastroepiploic artery composite grafting.

We have studied the results of 402 consecutive cases of beating heart coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and evaluated the usefulness of gastroepiploic artery (GEA) composite grafts. Between March 1993 and August 2001, 402 patients underwent beating heart CABG. They were 321 male and 81 female patients, aged 17 to 88 (mean 66) years. Beating heart CABG was facilitated by mechanical stabilization with a doughnut stabilizer, a newly designed sternal retractor and a new coronary perfusion system. Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) was performed in 206 patients (the MIDCAB Group), and beating heart CABG with median sternotomy (OPCAB) was performed in 196 patients (the OPCAB Group). Definite off-pump CABG was accomplished in 381 patients. 21 patients (5%) were converted to on-pump beating heart CABG using percutaneous cardiopulmonary system via femoral vessels because of hemodynamic instability. There was 1 operative mortality (0.2%). There was perioperative myocardial infarction in 2 (0.5%), and cerebral infarction in 3 (0.7%). The rate of complete revascularization was 78% in the MIDCAB Group and 97% in the OPCAB Group. The mean number of anastomoses was 1.6 in the MIDCAB Group and 3.3 in the OPCAB Group. The early graft patency was 99.1% in a left internal thoracic artery graft, 97.0% in a right internal thoracic artery graft, 96.5% in GEA, 98.2% in a radial artery graft, and 94.2% in a vein graft. A GEA composite graft was used in 55 of the 168 patients who received GEA grafting. The mean number of anastomoses for the GEA composite graft was 1.6 +/- 0.6 per patient. The graft patency rate was 94.6% (53/56) for GEA and 98.6% (72/73) for the radial artery used as a composite graft. A consecutive series of beating heart CABG was performed safely and effectively with a low mortality rate and low morbidity rate. Beating heart CABG could be performed in all patients, and definite off-pump CABG was accomplished in 95% of them. In order to aim for complete revascularization, GEA composite graft was found to be effective since it required a low mean number of 1.6 anastomoses and a satisfactory patency rate at the same time.

Effects of minimal invasive coronary artery bypass on pulmonary function and postoperative pain

Background. Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) requires substantially smaller incisions than conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). We investigated whether this fact may lead to less postoperative pain and improved pulmonary function. Methods. Preoperative and postoperative (days 1, 3, and 5) pulmonary function and postoperative pain were assessed in 15 patients undergoing MIDCAB (group A) by using a standardized score and were compared with 15 patients admitted for CABG (group B). Results. Total operation time (140 minutes versus 189 minutes; p < 0.001) and duration of mechanical ventilation (300 minutes versus 840 minutes; p < 0.001) were significantly less in group A. Pulmonary function was comparable between the 2 groups on postoperative day 1 (POD 1). Vital capacity was significantly greater in group A on POD 3 (59.7% versus 40.6%; p < 0.001) and on POD 5 (74.4% versus 53.9%; p < 0.001). Similar results were found for forced expiratory volume in 1 second (group A versus B on POD 3: 56.3% versus 42.2%; p < 0.05; and on POD 5: 68.4% versus 55.5%; p < 0.01). Postoperative pain was significantly higher in group A (POD 1: score 5.5 versus 3.6; POD 3: 4.0 versus 2.9; p < 0.01). Conclusions. MIDCAB procedures lead to better preservation of pulmonary function compared with conventional CABG despite greater postoperative pain.