Minimally Invasive Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Is Associated With Improved Clinical Outcomes

Abstract

Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting is safe, and early clinical outcomes are comparable, if not superior in some respects, to OPCAB. Extubation in the OR is feasible, well tolerated, and associated with earlier discharge. Shorter hospital stays may decrease resource use and promote earlier return to activities; however, further research is needed.

Assessment of Physical Activity by Wearable Technology During Rehabilitation After Cardiac Surgery: Explorative Prospective Monocentric Observational Cohort Study (Preprint)

“…Hospital length of stay (LOS), however, showed no significant difference between the two study groups. This is in contrast to other studies [28][29][30], which could be due to small sample size. But this variable might be dependent on institutional protocols and decision-making of physicians and surgeons as well [31].…”

Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery in China: Multi-Center Experience

“…Since the 1990s, minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) has had substantial progress and innovation [ 1 , 2 ]. A variety of MICS procedures have been reported in the literature, including minithoracotomy [ 3 – 6 ], hemi-sternotomy [ 7 ], video-assisted approach [ 8 ], completely thoracoscopic approach [ 9 ], robotic procedure [ 10 ], and catheter-based hybrid approach [ 11 ]. The results suggest that MICS is associated with the potential benefit of improved cosmesis, less pain, shorter recovery duration, and faster return to normal activities, without compromising the safety of the procedure [ 12 , 13 ].…”

Operative mortality with coronary artery bypass graft

“…Patients were followed up for a mean of 18.5 months, and 4.6% of patients in the MICS group underwent repeat revascularization, compared with 5.8% in the OPCAB group. This study did not demonstrate any statistically significant differences in composite end-point of death or repeat revascularization during the follow-up period [35]. While MICS yields quicker patient recovery and enhanced freedom from infection and wound healing issues [36], it is still paramount for the MICS CABG surgeon to maintain patency and survival rates that are at least equivalent to those observed in sternotomy-access coronary surgery (Tables 1 and 2).…”

“…In a patency sub-study, 91 patients who underwent MICS had no peri-operative deaths or death at 6 months, and computed tomography angiography revealed 92% overall graft patency along with a 100% LIMA graft patency at 6 months [34 & ]. Rabindranauth et al compared MICS with OPCAB in a 1 : 2 ratio, and saw that MICS patients were more often extubated in the operating room (70% of patients compared with 12.7%, P ¼ 0.001), had shorter median length of stay (4 vs. 5 days; P ¼ 0.002), and had no 30-day mortality, compared with one in the OPCAB group (P ¼ 0.9) [35] (Table 2). Patients were followed up for a mean of 18.5 months, and 4.6% of patients in the MICS group underwent repeat revascularization, compared with 5.8% in the OPCAB group.…”