Comparison of standard coronary artery bypass grafting and minimary invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting

Okawa, Yasuhide; Baba, Hiroshi; Hashimoto, Masaki; Tanaka, Tsuneo; Toyama, Masahiko; Matsumoto, Kouji; Azuma, K

doi:10.1007/bf03218240

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The predischarge angiographic patency of 93.5% for the MVP system was very encouraging and compares favorably with other CABG trials with angiographic end points at this time point. 13,14 Of particular note was the 100% patency rate of the MVP in the LITA-LAD position. In the group of hand-sewn anastomosis 3 grafts had a stenosis Ͼ50%.…”

Section: Angiographic Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Magnetic vascular coupling for distal anastomosis in coronary artery bypass grafting: A multicenter trial

Klima

Falk

Maringka

et al. 2003

The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Angiographic Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Magnetic vascular coupling for distal anastomosis in coronary artery bypass grafting: A multicenter trial

Klima

Falk

Maringka

et al. 2003

The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Five-year survival ranges between 80% and 95% in different publications including high risk and elderly patients (19)(20)(21). The 5-year survival of our patients after MIDCAB of 93.6%, the 10-year survival of 76.2% and 15-year survival of 67.5% is comparable with other studies (13,14,(19)(20)(21).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Short-term clinical outcomes and long-term survival of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting

Raja¹,

Garg²,

Rochon³

et al. 2018

Ann. Cardiothorac. Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 shortterm 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.Keywords: Proximal left anterior descending artery; minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting (MIDCAB grafting); minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB); minimally invasive revascularization; left internal mammary artery (LIMA)

show abstract

“…In the light of these considerations, it is has to be stressed that the quality of the MIDCAB procedure can only remain high when performed in centers with case loads adequate to allow surgeons to continuously sustain their skill level [Okawa 2000;Vicol 2003;Holzhey 2007b]. Under these circumstances, MIDCAB is a true alternative to conventional surgery.…”

Section: E66mentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of a 13-Year Single-Center Experience with Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass as the Primary Surgical Treatment of Coronary Artery Disease

Holzhey¹,

Cornely²,

Rastan³

et al. 2012

HSF

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Comparison of standard coronary artery bypass grafting and minimary invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting

Abstract: Although patency and stenosis incidence did not differ between 2 groups, freedom from cardiac accidents was lower in the MIDCAB group.

Cited by 5 publications

References 9 publications

Magnetic vascular coupling for distal anastomosis in coronary artery bypass grafting: A multicenter trial

Magnetic vascular coupling for distal anastomosis in coronary artery bypass grafting: A multicenter trial

Short-term clinical outcomes and long-term survival of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting

Review of a 13-Year Single-Center Experience with Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass as the Primary Surgical Treatment of Coronary Artery Disease

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About