Totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass graft: initial experience with an additional instrument arm and an advanced camera system

Robotic coronary artery bypass grafting

Robotically assisted surgery enables coronary surgery to be performed totally or partially endoscopically. Using the Da Vinci robotic technology allows minimally invasive treatments. We report on our experience with coronary artery surgery in our department: patients requiring single or double vessel surgical revascularization were eligible. The procedure was performed without cardiopulmonary bypass on a beating heart. From April 2004 to May 2008, 55 consecutive patients were enrolled in the study, and were operated on by a single surgical team. Operative outcomes included operative time, estimated blood loss, transfusions, ventilation time, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay. Average operative time was 270 ± 101 min with an estimated blood loss of 509 ± 328 ml, a postoperative ventilation time of 6 ± 12 h, ICU stay of 52 ± 23 h, and a hospital stay of 7 ± 3 days. Nine patients (16%) were converted to open techniques, and transfusion was required in four patients (7%). Follow-up was complete for all patients up to 1 year. There was one hospital death (1.7%) and two deaths at follow-up. Coronary anastomosis was controlled in 48 patients by either angiogram or computed tomography scan, revealing occlusion or anastomotic stenoses (>50%) in six patients. Overall permeability was 92%. Major adverse events occurred in 12 patients (21%). One-year survival was 96%. Our initial experience with robotically assisted coronary surgery is promising: it avoids sternotomy and with a methodical approach we were able to implement the procedure safely and effectively in our practice, combining minimal mortality with excellent survival.

Robotically-assisted coronary artery bypass grafting

Objectives. Robotic surgery enables to perform coronary surgery totally endoscopically. This report describes our experience using the da Vinci system for coronary artery bypass surgery. Methods. Patients requiring single-or-double vessel revascularization were eligible. The procedure was performed without cardiopulmonary bypass on a beating heart. Results. From April 2004 to May 2008, fifty-six patients were enrolled in the study. Twenty-four patients underwent robotic harvesting of the mammary conduit followed by minimal invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB), and twenty-three patients had a totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass (TECAB) grafting. Nine patients (16%) were converted to open techniques. The mean total operating time for TECAB was 372 ± 104 minutes and for MIDCAB was 220 ± 69 minutes. Followup was complete for all patients up to one year. There was one hospital death following MIDCAB and two deaths at follow up. Forty-eight patients had an angiogram or CT scan revealing occlusion or anastomotic stenoses (>50%) in 6 patients. Overall permeability was 92%. Conclusions. Robotic surgery can be performed with promising results.

Do manual assisting maneuvers increase speed and technical performance in robotically sutured coronary bypass graft anastomoses?

BACKGROUND

Robotic endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting procedures usually are performed as solo surgery operations. This study aimed to investigate whether manual assistance can reduce suturing times and anastomotic suturing problems in robotic coronary artery surgery.

METHODS

In isolated pig hearts, the right coronary artery was excised from the epicardium as a pedicle. This pedicled vessel, which resembles the internal mammary artery, was sutured to the left anterior descending artery using the daVinci telemanipulation system. The anastomosis was performed in a running fashion using 7/0 Pronova. In group 1 (n = 20), the suture was performed by the console surgeon as a solo operation. In group 2 (n = 20), the anastomosis was assisted by a team member using an endo forceps. The operations were performed by five surgeons of different training levels.

RESULTS

The overall anastomotic time was 24 +/- 15 min in group 1 and 22 +/- 12 min in group 2. The difference was not significant. The rate for anastomotic suturing problems (thread rupture, knot formation, sling formation, needle bending) was 8 in 20 (40%) in group 1 and 8 in 20 (40%) in group 2 (no difference). Anastomotic times and anastomotic suturing errors were dependent on surgeon experience. All anastomoses in both groups showed correct suture alignment and were probe patent.

CONCLUSION

In a wet lab model of robotic coronary anastomoses, assisting maneuvers do not decrease suturing speed. Similar suturing quality can be achieved whether the suture is performed in a solo fashion or in an assisted manner.