Graft patency and completeness of revascularization in minimally invasive multivessel coronary artery bypass surgery

Minimally Invasive Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a systematic review of all available evidence on the feasibility and safety of minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (MICS CABG) in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS

A systematic literature search in PubMed, MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science was performed to identify all relevant studies evaluating outcomes of MICS CABG among patients with multivessel CAD and including at least 15 patients with no restriction on the publication date.

RESULTS

A total of 881 studies were identified, of which 26 studies met the eligibility criteria. The studies included a total of 7,556 patients. The average patient age was 63.3 years (range 49.5 to 69.0 years), male patients were an average of 77.8% (54.0% to 89.8%), and body mass index was 29.8 kg/m2 (24.5 to 30.1 kg/m2). Early mortality and stroke were on average 0.6% (range 0% to 2.0%) and 0.4% (range 0% to 1.3%), respectively. The average number of grafts was 2.8 (range 2.1 to 3.7). The average length of hospital stay was 5.6 days (range 3.1 to 9.3 days).

CONCLUSIONS

MICS CABG appears to be a safe method in well-selected patients with multivessel CAD. This approach is concentrated at dedicated centers, and there is no widespread application, although it has potential to be widely applicable as an alternative for surgical revascularization. However, large randomized controlled studies with longer follow-up are still required to compare the outcomes with conventional CABG and other revascularization strategies.

The efficacy of minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (mics cabg) for patients with coronary artery diseases and diabetes: a single center retrospective study

BACKGROUND

conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CCABG) tends to cause severe complications in patients with comorbid Coronary Artery Diseases (CAD) and diabetes. On the other hand, the Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (MICS CABG) via transthoracic incision is associated with rapid recovery and reduced complications. Adding to the limited literature, this study compares CCABG and MICS CABG in terms of efficacy and safety.

METHODS

Herein, 104 CCABG and MICS CABG cases (52 cases each) were included. The patients were recruited from the Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery Center, Anzhen Hospital, between January 2017 and December 2021 and were selected based on the Propensity Score Matching (PSM) model. The key outcomes included All-cause Death, Myocardial Infarction (MI), Cerebrovascular Events, revascularization, Adverse Wound Healing Events and one-year patency of the graft by coronary CTA.

RESULTS

Compared to CCABG, MICS CABG had longer surgical durations [4.25 (1.50) h vs.4.00 (1.13) h, P = 0.028], but showed a reduced intraoperative blood loss [600.00 (400.00) mL vs.700.00 (300.00) mL, P  = 0.032] and a lower secondary incision debridement and suturing rate (5.8% vs.19.2%, P = 0.038). In follow up, no statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in the cumulative Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Events (MACCEs) incidence (7.7% vs. 5.9%), all-cause mortality (0 vs. 0), MI incidence (1.9% vs. 2.0%), cerebral apoplexy incidence (5.8% vs. 3.9%), and repeated revascularization incidence (0 vs. 0) (P > 0.05). Additionally, coronary CTA results revealed that the two groups' one-year graft patency (94.2% vs. 90.2%, P = 0.761) showed no statistically significant difference.

CONCLUSION

In patients with comorbid CAD and diabetes, MICS CABG and CCABG had comparable revascularization performances. Moreover, MICS CABG can effectively reduce, if not prevent, poor clinical outcomes/complications, including incision healing, sternal infection and prolonged length of stay in diabetes patients.