A review of nomenclature in minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting-the anarchy of terminology

OBJECTIVES

Since the development of minimally invasive coronary surgery, nomenclature has rapidly grown to distinguish each unique method. The goal of this review was to provide a comprehensive overview of the different terms used for minimally invasive coronary bypass grafting through the years.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in August 2024 using the PubMed electronic database. To extract the best search results: "minimally invasive" and "coronary artery bypass grafting" were used as either keywords or MeSH terms. The term robotic was specifically included for a second search. Eligible articles for this review were articles using an abbreviation to describe minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting.

RESULTS

A total of 2118 publications on non-robotic minimally invasive coronary procedures and 392 on robotic-assisted techniques were reviewed, describing 40 unique terms for the procedure. Procedures were grouped based on left internal mammary artery harvest and anastomosis methods: mini-thoracotomy for both harvesting and coronary anastomosis (n = 586), endoscopic harvest with mini-thoracotomy (n = 37), robotic harvest with mini-thoracotomy (n = 144) and closed-chest revascularization (n = 140). Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting was the most studied technique (486 publications, non-robotic and robotic), followed by closed-chest totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass (n = 124).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, a wide variety of terms are used within the field of minimally invasive coronary surgery. A total of 40 different terms have been published, each describing certain specifics of the procedure. For anyone involved in the field of minimally invasive surgery, it is important to understand the differences and similarities of these procedures.

Robotic Totally Endoscopic Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes from the Past two Decades

Robotic totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting (TECAB) was introduced in 1998 and has over a period of two decades gradually emerged from single-vessel revascularization to multivessel bypass grafting. Dedicated centers have continuously evolved and further developed this minimally invasive method of coronary bypass surgery. A literature review was conducted to assess intra- and postoperative outcomes of TECAB. PubMed returned 19 comprehensive articles on TECAB. Investigation was focused on perioperative outcome parameters, i.e.: operative time, conversion to larger incision, revision for bleeding, atrial fibrillation, stroke, acute renal failure, and mortality. Outcome from the analysis of 2,397 reported cases showed an average operative time of 291 ± 57 minutes (range 112 to 1,050), conversion rate to larger incisions at 11.5%, and perioperative mortality at 0.8%. Pooled data demonstrated 4.2% operative revision rate due to postoperative hemorrhage, 1.0% stroke incidence, 1.6% acute renal failure, and 13.3% de novo atrial fibrillation. The mean length of hospital stay measured 5.8 ± 1.7 days. Conversion rates and operative times decreased over time. According to data in the literature, coronary bypass surgery carried out in completely endoscopic fashion utilizing robotic assistance can require relatively extensive operative times and conversion rates are somewhat higher than in other robotic cardiac surgery. However, major postoperative events lie in an acceptable range. TECAB remains the surgical revascularization method with the least tissue trauma and represents an opportunity for coronary artery bypass grafting via port access. Rates of major complications are at least similar to conventional surgical access procedures.