Minimally Invasive Isolated and Hybrid Surgical Revascularization for Multivessel Coronary Disease: A Single-Center Long-Term Follow-Up

INTRODUCTION

Some evidence suggests that surgical minimally invasive (MIDCAB) and hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) are safe and potentially effective at short-term follow-up. Data on long-term outcomes are more limited and inconclusive.

METHODS

Between February 2013 and December 2023, a total of 1997 patients underwent surgical coronary artery revascularization at our institution, of whom, 92 (4.7%) received left anterior mini-thoracotomy access (MIDCAB), either isolated (N = 78) or in combination with percutaneous coronary intervention (N = 14, HCR group).

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 75 months (range 3.1: 149 months), cardiac mortality was 0% while overall mortality was 3%, with one in-hospital mortality and two additional late deaths. Conversion to sternotomy happened in two patients (2.1%), and surgical re-explorations occurred in five patients (4.6%), of whom three for bleeding and two for graft failure. All patients received left internal mammary (LIMA) to left anterior descending artery (LAD) grafting (100%). In the HCR group, 10 patients (72%) showed percutaneous revascularization (PCI) after MIDCAB, showing PCI on a mean of 1.6 ± 0.6 vessels and implanting 2.1 ± 0.9 drug-eluting stents.

CONCLUSIONS

MIDCAB, in isolation or in association with hybrid coronary revascularization, is associated with encouraging short- and long-term results in selected patients discussed within a dedicated heart-team.

The Current State of Hybrid Coronary Revascularization

Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) combines a minimally invasive surgical approach with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for the treatment of multi-vessel coronary artery disease. Despite decades of use, widespread acceptance has been limited. In this review, we conduct a comparative assessment of HCR in relation to traditional coronary artery bypass graft surgery and multi-vessel PCI. While large scale randomized data is still lacking, numerous studies have demonstrated that HCR may offer benefits regarding resource utilization and short-term morbidity, while delivering comparable mid- and long-term survival compared to traditional bypass surgery. Compared to PCI, HCR may offer similar peri-procedural morbidity, while mitigating the need for repeat revascularization by providing a surgical arterial bypass graft to the left anterior descending artery.

Comparing clinical outcomes of hybrid coronary revascularization with open coronary artery bypass in patients with multi-vessels lesions

OBJECTIVES

Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) involves the use of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) to treat the left anterior descending artery (LAD), and percutaneous coronary intervention to treat non-LAD vessels. We reported the results of a comparative analysis between HCR and off-pump CABG via sternotomy (OPCABG).

METHODS

Data were retrospectively collated from patients who underwent HCR or OPCABG for multivessel coronary artery disease between 2011 and 2022. Propensity score-based matching was performed to reduce the selection bias. The Comparisons of cardiac-related death, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), and repeat revascularization were performed by Kaplan-Meier analysis or the Fine-Gray test.

RESULTS

After matching, the baseline characteristics were well-balanced between the two groups with 91 patients per group. There was no significant difference in operative mortality rate (1.1% for HCR vs2.2% for OPCABG, p = 1.000). However, patients undergoing HCR required a significantly lower rate of blood product transfusions (p < .001) and experienced significantly fewer pulmonary complications than OPCABG patients (p < .001). At 10 years, the incidences of cardiac-related death, MACCE and repeat revascularization did not differ significantly between the two groups (9.5% vs11.5%, p = .277; 4.7% vs12.3%, p = .361; 1.2% vs2.5%, p = .914, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with multi-vessel lesions, HCR was comparable to OPCABG in long-term outcomes such as cardiac-related death, MACCE, and the durability of grafts. Additionally, HCR was better than OPCABG in perioperative outcomes. HCR may be an alternative therapy for OPCABG in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease.

Hybrid robotic-assisted coronary revascularization and transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a single-center experience

OBJECTIVES

The efficacy of hybrid robotic-assisted coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for coronary and aortic valve disease is poorly reported. Herein, we report our experience with this hybrid approach.

METHODS

Between January 2018 and June 2022, 10 (7 male, 3 female) patients with a mean age of 81 years underwent the hybrid procedure. Coronary revascularization was performed prior to TAVR with robotic-assisted left internal mammary artery-to-left anterior descending (LAD) bypass grafting for left main or proximal LAD lesions with or without multivessel disease with or without hybrid percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

RESULTS

Five patients had left main disease, and 5 had proximal LAD disease with or without multivessel disease. All patients tolerated the robotic-assisted CABG procedure well; 9 patients were extubated in the operating room and all patients were ambulatory on postoperative day 1. Five patients underwent hybrid PCI for non-LAD lesions. TAVR was subsequently performed at intervals ranging from 3 days to 5 months after CABG. One patient with end-stage renal disease on hemodialysis required hospitalization for heart failure during the interval period. The 1-year mortality rate was 0%, and 3 patients died during late follow-up (24-43 months).

CONCLUSIONS

This innovative, less invasive approach demonstrates the potential for early recovery in appropriately selected patients with complex coronary and aortic valve disease with promising mid-term outcomes.

Long-Term Outcomes After Hybrid Coronary Revascularization Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Meta-Analysis of Kaplan-Meier-Derived Data

Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) is an alternative option to conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), but the long-term outcomes of HCR versus CABG remain unclear. We aimed to analyze the long-term outcomes after HCR and CABG for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease using meta-analysis. A systemic literature search of PubMed and EMBASE was performed from inception to March 2023. Studies reporting Kaplan-Meier curves with follow-up ≥1 year were included. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, and the secondary outcomes were major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) and repeat revascularization. In total, 13 studies (1 randomized controlled trial and 12 propensity-score matched observational studies) were analyzed. The mean follow-up period was 5.1 ± 3.1 years. HCR was associated with similar overall mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87 to 1.36), significantly higher incidence of MACCEs (HR 1.49, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.06), and repeat revascularization (HR 2.01, 95% CI 1.53 to 2.64) compared with CABG. In phase-specific analysis, the mortality rate was similar, and the incidence of repeat revascularization was higher in HCR regardless of phases. The incidence of MACCEs was higher in HCR during the mid-term phase (1 to 5 years), but it was similar during the long-term phase (long-term: ≥5 years). In conclusion, despite the higher incidence of MACCEs and repeat revascularization compared with CABG, HCR offered a similar long-term survival. Even longer-term follow-up and randomized controlled trials with a large population are warranted to investigate the role of HCR for multivessel coronary artery disease.

Drug-coated balloons: A better revascularization strategy in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing one-stop hybrid coronary revascularization surgery

BACKGROUND

The optimal revascularization strategy for non-left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) lesions during one-stop hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) surgery lacks current evidence.

AIMS

This study aimed to compare the outcomes of the drug-coated balloon (DCB) and drug-eluting stent (DES) strategies in patients with non-small non-LAD lesions undergoing one-stop HCR.

METHODS

A total of 141 consecutive patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVCAD) undergoing one-stop HCR between June 1, 2018 and March 1, 2022 were retrospectively included in this study. In-hospital outcomes and mid-term major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) were observed. Kaplan-Meier curve analysis was used to evaluate the MACCE-free survival rate. The Cox proportional hazard model was used to identify risk factors of mid-term MACCE.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight and 103 patients received only DCB or DES therapy, respectively, in this study. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics and laboratory parameters between the two groups. The in-hospital MACCE rate in the DES group was numerically higher than that in the DCB group (9.7% vs. 5.3%, respectively), but the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.4). The incidence of MACCE after patients' discharge was significantly higher in the DES group (22% vs. 5.3%, respectively, P = 0.02) during a median follow-up of 20 months. After multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis, DCB therapy was independently associated with reduced risk of mid-term MACCE (hazard ratio, 0.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.06-0.91; P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

For patients with MVCAD undergoing one-stop HCR, DCB therapy may be the optimal revascularization strategy for non-small non-LAD coronary artery lesions with a significantly lower rate of mid-term MACCE.

Revascularization Modalities in Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Review of the Current State of Evidence

Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) stands as a leading global cause of mortality, underscoring the importance of effective prevention, early diagnosis, and timely intervention. While medications offer benefits to many patients, revascularization procedures such as coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and emerging hybrid approaches remain pivotal for ACS management. This review delves into the 2018 ESC/EACTS guidelines alongside an analysis of existing literature to shed light on the spectrum of revascularization methods. While both CABG and PCI demonstrate promising outcomes, the optimal choice between the two hinges on a comprehensive assessment of individual patient factors, anatomical complexity guided by advanced imaging, comorbidities, and age. The determination of whether to pursue culprit or total revascularization, as well as immediate or staged revascularization, is contingent upon various factors, including age, disease complexity, and clinical outcomes. This evidence-based decision-making process is orchestrated by a multidisciplinary heart team grounded in ongoing clinical evaluation. The primary objective of this review is to provide valuable insights into revascularization strategies and scrutinize the congruence of current guidelines with recent advancements in the field.

Minimal invasive coronary surgery is not associated with increased mortality or morbidity during the period of learning curve

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive procedures for coronary revascularization have been performed for over 20 years; however, their technical complexity, steep learning curves and absence of training programs explain the weak acceptance of these techniques. The aim of this study is to describe the step-by-step learning process on how to establish a minimally invasive coronary artery revascularization program. The short-term outcomes of our first 30 patients were compared to our left internal mammary artery (LIMA) to left anterior descending (LAD) artery off pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) cohort as a quality control baseline.

METHODS

All patients who benefited from an endoscopic atraumatic coronary artery bypass (Endo-ACAB) in our hospital, from July 2018 to May 2020 (n = 30) were identified. Baseline demographics, peri, postoperative and laboratory data were extracted from each patient's medical records. These results were compared to our LIMA-LAD OPCAB cohort (n = 23).

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients were planned for a single LIMA-LAD Endo-ACAB. The remaining two had a T-graft double Endo-ACAB. Ten patients had a hybrid revascularization with the culprit lesion being treated first. Three patients were converted to sternotomy because of a LIMA lesion during thoracoscopic harvesting. We accounted three major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Demographic, peri and postoperative data showed no significant differences between the Endo-ACAB and the OPCAB group.

CONCLUSION

Endo-ACAB is a technically demanding operation, however, it can safely be introduced in centers with no previous experience with no extra cost in terms of morbidity or mortality. Thoracoscopic LIMA harvesting is the most demanding surgical skill to acquire.

Simultaneous Hybrid Coronary Revascularization vs Conventional Strategies for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: A 10-Year Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

Although evidence is sufficient to confirm that hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) is safe and effective in the short term, its value in the long run is debatable.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to compare the long-term outcomes of HCR with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for multivessel disease.

METHODS

Three groups of patients, 540 each, receiving HCR, CABG, or PCI between June 2007 to September 2018, were matched using propensity score matching. Patients were stratified by EuroSCORE (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation) II (low ≤0.9; 0.9 < medium <1.5; high ≥1.5) and SYNTAX (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score (low ≤22; 22 < medium <33; high ≥33). Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) scores were compared among the 3 groups.

RESULTS

In terms of MACCE and SAQ, HCR performed similarly to off-pump CABG but significantly outperformed PCI (P < 0.001). In the low-to-medium EuroSCORE II and medium-to-high SYNTAX score tertiles, MACCE rates in the HCR group were significantly lower than those in the PCI (EuroSCORE II: low, 30.7% vs 41.2%; P = 0.006; medium, 31.3% vs 41.7%; P = 0.013; SYNTAX score: medium, 27.6% vs 41.2%; P = 0.018; high, 32.4% vs 52.7%; P = 0.011) but were similar to those in the CABG group. In the high EuroSCORE II stratum, HCR had a lower MACCE rate than CABG (31.9% vs 47.0%; P = 0.041) and PCI (31.9% vs 53.7%; P = 0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with conventional strategies, HCR provided satisfactory long-term outcomes in MACCE and functional status for multivessel disease.

A Nationwide Study of Clinical Outcomes After Robot-Assisted Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery and Hybrid Revascularization in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVE

Robot-assisted minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (RA-MIDCAB) surgery and hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) are minimally invasive alternative strategies to conventional coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with isolated left anterior descending (LAD) stenosis or multivessel coronary disease. We analyzed a large, multicenter data-set based on the Netherlands Heart Registration including all patients undergoing RA-MIDCAB.

METHODS

We included 440 consecutive patients who underwent RA-MIDCAB with the left internal thoracic artery to LAD between January 2016 and December 2020. A proportion of patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of non-LAD vessels (i.e., HCR). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at median follow-up of 1 year, which was subdivided into cardiac and noncardiac. Secondary outcomes included target vessel revascularization (TVR) at median follow-up as well as 30-day mortality, perioperative myocardial infarction, reoperation for bleeding or anastomosis-related problems, and in-hospital ischemic cerebrovascular accident (iCVA).

RESULTS

Among all patients, 91 (21%) underwent HCR. At median (IQR) follow-up of 19 (8 to 28) months, 11 patients (2.5%) had died. In 7 patients, the cause of death was defined as cardiac. TVR occurred in 25 patients (5.7%), of whom 4 underwent CABG and 21 underwent PCI. At 30-day follow-up, 6 patients (1.4%) had a perioperative myocardial infarction, of whom 1 died. One patient (0.2%) developed an iCVA, and 18 patients (4.1%) underwent reoperation for bleeding or anastomosis-related problems.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical outcomes of patients undergoing RA-MIDCAB or HCR in the Netherlands are good and promising when compared with the currently available literature.

Hybrid Coronary Revascularization: Early Outcomes and Midterm Follow-Up in Patients Undergoing Single or Multivessel Robotic TECAB and PCI

OBJECTIVE

Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) is the integration of sternal-sparing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). It is traditionally performed with single-vessel bypass (left internal mammary artery [LIMA] to left anterior descending artery [LAD]) and PCI but can also be accomplished with multiple arterial grafts using bilateral IMA conduits. We sought to review our HCR experience over an 8-year period with robotic totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass (TECAB) and PCI.

METHODS

Of 694 patients undergoing beating-heart TECAB from August 2013 to June 2022, 306 patients were designated as intention-to-treat HCR candidates. Patients underwent PCI prior to, the same day as, or following TECAB, performed using single or bilateral IMA grafts. We retrospectively reviewed early and midterm outcomes up to 8 years in this cohort of patients.

RESULTS

The mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality was 1.5% ± 2.5%. There were 44 patients (14%) who had ≥70% left main disease and 218 patients (71%) who had triple-vessel disease. A total of 193 patients (63%) underwent multivessel grafting (advanced HCR), with 83% bilateral IMA use. Mean operative time was 263 ± 80 min, and mean length of stay was 2.6 days. The mean number of vessels bypassed per patient was 1.7 ± 0.6. The mean number of vessels stented was 1.2 ± 0.5. Of the patients, 84% underwent TECAB first, 14% PCI first, and 2% same-day TECAB/PCI. Mortality was 0.6% (observed to expected ratio: 0.42). Early graft patency was 97% (328 of 339 grafts); LIMA-LAD patency was 98%. At 8-year follow-up (mean 37 ± 26 months), all-cause and cardiac-related mortality were 13% and 2.6%, respectively. Freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events was 92%.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with multivessel CAD, integrating robotic single and multivessel TECAB with PCI resulted in excellent early and midterm outcomes. In experienced hands, the robotic endoscopic approach allows the routine use of multiple arterial grafting during HCR.

Hybrid coronary revascularization in multivessel coronary artery disease: a systematic review

Aim: Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) for multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) integrates coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous intervention in a planned revascularization strategy. This systematic review summarizes the state of this art of this technique. Methods: Major databases searched until October 2021. Results: The available literature on HCR includes three randomized trials, ten meta-analysis and 27 retrospective studies. The greatest benefits are observed in patients with low-to-intermediate risk and less complex coronary anatomy; highly complex disease and the presence of risk factors favored conventional CABG in terms of adverse events and survival. Conclusion: HCR is an interesting approach for multivessel CAD but should not be considered a 'one-size-fits-all' procedure. Further studies will specify the subset of patients likely to benefit most from this hybrid approach.

Five-Year Outcomes After Hybrid Coronary Revascularization: A Single Center Experience

OBJECTIVE

Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) combines both surgical and percutaneous coronary revascularization procedures. It offers a minimally invasive strategy for multivessel coronary artery disease and combines the advantages of both. However, quantitative long-term patency and clinical outcomes remain understudied. The objective of this study was to assess clinical outcomes and graft and stent patency at 5-year follow-up.

METHODS

From January 2004 to January 2015, 120 patients were enrolled in this study. They underwent robotically assisted minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting of left internal thoracic artery (LITA) to the left descending artery (LAD) and percutaneous coronary intervention of non-LAD vessels. Primary outcome was graft (LITA-LAD) patency determined at 5 years of follow-up, assessed by computed tomography angiography and rest and stress myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS-MIBI). Secondary outcomes were stent patency and major adverse major cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE). Also, freedom from recurrence of angina was assessed.

RESULTS

At follow-up, 18 of 120 patients (15%) had died (in 5 patients the cause of death was cardiovascular). Among survivors, follow-up was achieved in 83 of 102 (81%). In 76 of 83 patients (92%) there was a patent LITA-LAD graft and in 75 of 83 (90%) a patent stent was demonstrated. MACCE occurred in 36 of 120 patients (30%). Freedom from recurrence of angina occurred in 92 of 120 patients (77%).

CONCLUSIONS

HCR is a safe and a promising procedure. It provides a minimally invasive approach and results in complete revascularization with good 5-year patency and clinical outcomes.

[Immediate results of three methods of surgical myocardial revascularization in multivessel lesion of the coronary bed]

INTRODUCTION

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PTI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are currently the most commonly used techniques of myocardial revascularization. However, each of the methods has its own advantages and disadvantages. The creation of hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) was based on an attempt to combine the benefits of CABG and PTI.

AIM

The study was aimed at assessing the immediate results of three methods of surgical myocardial revascularization in patients with multivessel lesions of the coronary bed in stable ischaemic heart disease.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study enrolled a total of 155 patients randomized into three groups of myocardial revascularization: HCR, CABG and PTI. In the HCR group, the first stage consisted in minimally invasive myocardial revascularization with the anterior descending artery (ADA) followed by PTI (within 1-3 days) with implantation of drug-eluting second-generation stents Xience to other coronary vessels. In the CABG and PTI groups we performed CABG and PTI, respectively, using the Xience stents. In all three groups we assessed the procedural success, frequency of major adverse cardiovascular events and bleeding.

RESULTS

Full myocardial revascularization was achieved in all three groups in more than 90% of cases. No statistically significant differences in either the procedural success rate or frequency of major adverse cardiovascular events between the CABG, PTI and HCR were revealed. The PTI group was characterized by the lowest frequency of bleeding, need for rehabilitation, and length of hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

Hybrid revascularization with the use of minimally invasive direct myocardial revascularization with the ADA followed by PTI with second-generation drug-eluting stents to other coronary arteries is a method of choice in treatment of patients with multivessel lesions of coronary arteries.

The Utility of a 3D Endoscope and Robot-Assisted System for MIDCAB

Background: Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) has been revived with new techniques and hybrid procedures for MIDCAB and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We reviewed the midterm results of MIDCAB with a three-dimensional (3D) endoscope in our institution.

Methods: Of the 359 patients who underwent off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) from December 2013 to March 2017, 54 had MIDCAB with the left internal thoracic artery (LITA) to left anterior descending (LAD) artery through a small left thoracotomy with a 3D endoscope. The same intercostal space was used for the main surgical incision and the insertion site of the 3D endoscope. In all, 22 patients had hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR), combined PCI and MIDCAB.

Results: There was no operative death. One patient had cerebral infarction without disability. No cases showed significant increases in CKMB. In all, 34 patients commenced ambulation on postoperative day 1. The postoperative hospital stay was 9.1 ± 5.0 days. In total, 37 patients had coronary computed tomography (CT), and their patency of LITA was 100%. In HCR, there was no mortality and major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE). Target lesion revascularization among 12 months was 1.6%.

Conclusion: The midterm results of MIDCAB with 3D endoscope-assisted LITA harvesting were satisfactory. MIDCAB, including HCR, is a good alternative for selected high-risk patients.

Hybrid Coronary Revascularization vs Complete Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) has emerged as a potential alternative to complete coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. However, the efficacy and safety of HCR vs CABG remain unclear. We therefore conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare these interventions.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane Library of Clinical Trials, and the Web of Science for studies comparing HCR to CABG in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and its components (myocardial infarction, stroke, mortality, and target-vessel revascularization [TVR]) at ≥1 year. Secondary outcomes included MACCE at ≤30 days, its components, and postoperative safety outcomes (renal failure, blood transfusion, new-onset atrial fibrillation, and infection).

RESULTS

One randomized controlled trial and 9 cohort studies were included in our systematic review. Pooled results indicate that HCR is associated with a lower risk for postoperative blood transfusion (odds ratio [OR], 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-0.68) and infection (OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.04-0.98), and a shorter hospital stay (6.0 days for HCR vs 7.8 days for CABG) and intensive care unit (ICU) stay (25.4 hours for HCR vs 45.7 hours for CABG). Long-term outcome data showed an association between HCR and long-term TVR (OR, 3.10; 95% CI, 1.39-6.90).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that compared to CABG, HCR is associated with a lower risk of postoperative blood transfusion and infection, as well as a shorter ICU stay and hospital stay. HCR was also associated with a higher risk of long-term TVR.

Coronary artery bypass grafting-fifty years of quality initiatives since Favaloro

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains one of the most commonly performed major surgical procedures worldwide and the most common procedure performed by cardiac surgeons. Rene Favaloro is widely credited with recognizing the true potential of CABG and subsequently popularizing the technique in a broad manner. Since the era of Favaloro in the late 1960s, the evolution of CABG can be understood through a series of quality initiatives that have defined which patients can benefit from the procedure and via which technique(s) they will derive the greatest benefit. Herein, we will review some of the key developments in CABG over the last 50 years with a focus on ongoing quality initiatives that will continue to refine the optimal applications and outcomes of CABG for the next 50 years.

A Comparison of Inflammatory Responses Between Robotically Enhanced Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting and Conventional Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Implications for Hybrid Revascularization

OBJECTIVE

The inflammatory response elicited by robotically enhanced coronary artery bypass grafting (r-CABG) has not been well described. When r-CABG is performed as part of hybrid coronary revascularization, the inflammatory milieu and the timing of percutaneous coronary intervention may affect the stent patency negatively in the short and long term. The goal of this study was to describe the extent and time course of cytokine release after r-CABG compared with conventional CABG (c-CABG) and to elucidate the optimal timing for r-CABG in the setting of hybrid coronary revascularization for a future study.

DESIGN

Prospective, observational study.

SETTING

Tertiary-care center in a university hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

The study comprised patients scheduled to undergo r-CABG or c-CABG from October 2012 to November 2014.

INTERVENTIONS

Cytokine levels of interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, IL-10; tumor necrosis factor-α; and C-reactive protein (CRP) were measured at the following time points: preprocedure; at the end of the procedure; and at 4, 8, 12, 24, and 48 hours after the procedure.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients undergoing r-CABG and 10 patients undergoing c-CABG were enrolled. The levels of cytokines after r-CABG and c-CABG were compared using the mixed-effect linear regression model for longitudinal data. Cytokine release in the r-CABG group was comparatively less for IL-6, IL-10, tumor necrosis factor, and CRP levels. They all trended toward the baseline by the 48th hour in both groups, except CRP levels, which reached their peak at 48 hours in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The inflammatory response to r-CABG was blunted compared with that of c-CABG. The high CRP levels on the second postoperative day after r-CABG were a cause for concern in regard to percutaneous coronary intervention performed at that time period, but additional studies are necessary.

Minimally Invasive Multivessel Coronary Surgery and Hybrid Coronary Revascularization: Can We Routinely Achieve Less Invasive Coronary Surgery?

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is the gold standard in managing severe coronary artery disease. However, it is associated with prolonged recovery and potential complications, in part due to the invasiveness of the procedure. Less invasive CABG techniques attempt to improve the quality and quantity of life in the same way as surgical revascularization but with fewer complications. Minimally invasive coronary surgery (MICS) through a small thoracotomy allows for complete revascularization with good results in graft patency. Perioperative mortality is low, and there is decreased need for blood transfusion, lower surgical site infection rates, and an earlier return to full physical function. Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) attempts to combine the advantages of coronary artery bypass grafting with those of percutaneous coronary intervention. Several studies have shown that HCR provides better short-term outcomes with regard to decreased ventilation and ICU time, reduced need for blood transfusion, and shortened hospital stay. However, the rates for major adverse cardiovascular events and mortality are comparable to conventional CABG, except for patients with a high SYNTAX score who displayed increased mortality rates. There is also strong evidence of a higher need for repeat revascularization with HCR compared to CABG. Overall, MICS and HCR appear to be viable alternatives to conventional CABG, offering a less invasive approach to coronary revascularization, which may be especially beneficial to high-risk patients. This article discusses approaches that deliver the advantages of minimally invasive surgical revascularization that can be adapted by surgeons with minimal investment with regards to training and infrastructure.

Clinical and angiographic results after hybrid coronary revascularization

BACKGROUND

With hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR), minimally invasive left internal mammary artery (LIMA) to left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) grafting is combined with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of non-LAD vessels. The purpose of this study was to examine the short-term clinical and angiographic results in one of the largest HCR series to date.

METHODS

From 2003 to 2012, 300 consecutive patients (aged 64±12 years, female 31.7%, predicted risk of mortality 1.6%±2.1%) underwent HCR on an intent-to-treat basis at a single institution. After robotic or thoracoscopic LIMA harvest, off-pump LIMA to LAD grafting was performed through a 3- to 4-cm sternal-sparing, non-rib-spreading thoracotomy. PCI was utilized to treat non-LAD lesions either before, after, or concomitant with the surgical procedure.

RESULTS

Of the 300 patients undergoing HCR on an intent-to-treat basis, HCR was performed with surgery first in 192 patients (64.0%), PCI first in 56 (18.7%), and as a concomitant procedure in 21 (7.0%). Of the 31 patients (10.1%) who did not undergo HCR, 24 patients (8.0%) did not have PCI and thus were incompletely revascularized. For all patients, 30-day mortality, stroke, and nonfatal myocardial infarction occurred in 4 (1.3%), 3 (1.0%), and 4 (1.3%), respectively. Angiographic LIMA evaluation was performed in 248 patients and revealed a FitzGibbon A LIMA patency rate of 97.6% (242 of 248 patients). Repeat revascularization was required in 13 of 300 patients (4.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Hybrid coronary revascularization represents an alternative approach for patients with multivessel coronary disease with excellent short-term outcomes. It provides a minimally invasive alternative to traditional coronary artery bypass graft surgery and may prove more durable than multivessel PCI.