Robot-assisted coronary artery bypass grafting improves short-term outcomes compared with minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting

Gong, Wei; Cai, Jianping; Wang, Zhe; Chen, Anqing; Ye, Xiaofeng; Li, Haiqing; Zhao, Qiang

doi:10.21037/jtd.2016.02.67

Cited by 27 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…RA-MIDCAB entails a shorter intubation time and a shorter stay at post-operative care units, with more patients transferred post-operatively to the PACU (fast-track treatment). These findings are in line with previous studies [26,27]. Hospital length of stay (LOS), however, showed no significant difference between the two study groups.…”

Section: Comparison Of Minimally Invasive and Conventional Coronary Asupporting

confidence: 92%

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

Thijs¹,

Fresiello²,

Oosterlinck³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Comparison Of Minimally Invasive and Conventional Coronary Asupporting

confidence: 92%

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

Thijs¹,

Fresiello²,

Oosterlinck³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of these, 13 were included in the review. [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] Detailed descriptions of included and excluded studies can be found in Appendix 1.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two studies were based on national databases, 10,11 and the remaining 11 studies were singlecentre. [7][8][9][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] Patients were selected between 1998 and 2014, and sample sizes ranged from 38 to 966 211. Seven studies compared RCAB to C-CABG, on or off pump, 7,[12][13][14][15][16][17] 3 studies compared RCAB to MIDCAB, [17][18][19] and 1 study compared RCAB to PA-CAB.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Robot-assisted coronary artery bypass surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

Hammal

Nagase

Menon

et al. 2020

cjs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Robot-assisted coronary bypass (RCAB) surgery has been proposed as an alternative to conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (C-CABG) for managing coronary heart disease, but the evidence on its performance compared to other existing treatments is unclear. The aim of this study was to assess, through a systematic review of comparative studies, the safety and clinical effectiveness of RCAB compared to C-CABG and other minimally invasive approaches for the treatment of coronary heart disease. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of primary studies in the English-language literature comparing RCAB to existing treatment options (C-CABG, minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass [MIDCAB] and port-access coronary artery bypass [PA-CAB]) following Cochrane Collaboration guidelines. Meta-analyses were performed where appropriate. Results: We reviewed 13 studies: 11 primary studies of RCAB (v. C-CABG in 7, v. MIDCAB in 3 and v. PA-CAB in 1) and 2 multicentre database studies (RCAB v. non-RCAB). The overall quality of the evidence was low. Most studies showed no significant benefit of RCAB over other treatments in a majority of outcome variables. Meta-analyses showed that RCAB had lower rates of pneumonia or wound infection than C-CABG, and shorter intensive care unit length of stay than C-CABG or MIDCAB. Individual studies showed that RCAB had some better outcomes than C-CABG (ventilation time, transfusion, postoperative pain, hospital length of stay) or MIDCAB (transfusion, postoperative pain, time to return to normal activities, physical functioning and hospital length of stay). The review of the database studies showed that RCAB was statistically superior to non-RCAB approaches in postoperative pain, renal failure, transfusion, reoperation for bleeding, stroke and hospital length of stay; however, the difference between the 2 groups in several of these outcomes was small. Conclusion: Although the findings from this review of comparative studies of RCAB appear promising and suggest that RCAB may offer some benefits to patients, in the absence of randomized controlled trials, these results should be interpreted cautiously.

show abstract

“…Less invasive cardiac surgery describes a group of alternative incisions or techniques that aim to reduce the surgical trauma, potential complications and burden of slow recovery following heart surgery. It is widely utilised in advanced centres in the West, China, Korea and Japan, (2)(3)(4)(5)(6) and facilitates and encompasses procedures on heart valves, coronary arteries, arrhythmias and heart failure in various permutations. The most sublime and advanced forms of less invasive cardiac surgery can be said to be hybrid procedures, which are executed by heart surgeons and cardiologists together or in sequence.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Establishment of a minimally invasive cardiac surgery programme in Singapore

Kofidis¹,

Chang²,

Lee³

2017

smedj

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although minimally invasive cardiac surgery is available in Singapore, it is not widely practised. Local surgeons have pioneered and introduced technologies in Singapore that were launched in the West to address various heart pathologies. However, in spite of the possibilities, the unique position and function of Singapore in the region, the structure and dynamics of cardiothoracic surgery practice in government centres and private practice, and the overall small volume of patients in the country may pose limitations in the thriving and sharing of such new technologies. Herein, we give an account of our progress and accomplishments with regard to minimally invasive cardiac surgery in Singapore and indicate areas of improvement that have further potential for synergy and growth.

show abstract

Robot-assisted coronary artery bypass grafting improves short-term outcomes compared with minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting

Abstract: RACAB may be a valuable alternative for patients requiring single or simple multi-vessel coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Although the mid-term mortality outcomes are similar, RACAB improves short-term outcomes and mid-term MACCE-free survival compared with MIDCAB.

Cited by 27 publications

References 23 publications

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

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

Robot-assisted coronary artery bypass surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

Establishment of a minimally invasive cardiac surgery programme in Singapore

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About