Key result
Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting was associated with higher rates of operating room extubation (70.0% vs 12.7%, P=0.001) and shorter hospital stays (4 vs 5 days, P=0.002).
Why the study?
Does minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting improve clinical outcomes compared to off-pump coronary artery bypass in patients requiring surgical revascularization?
Population
390 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting
Comparison
Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass… vs Off-pump coronary artery bypass via sternotomy
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
30 days
Authors
Loading...
May enable faster recovery in selected patients; leaves open need for RCTs versus OPCAB.
Cohort (n=390)
Does minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting improve clinical outcomes compared to off-pump coronary artery bypass in patients requiring surgical revascularization?
Absolute Event Rate: 70% vs 12.7%
p-value: p=0.001
MICS CABG is a safe alternative to OPCAB that facilitates earlier extubation and shorter hospital stays without increasing 30-day mortality or readmissions.
Rabindranauth et al. (2014) conducted a cohort in Coronary artery disease (n=390). Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (MICS CABG) vs. Off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) was evaluated on Extubation in the operating room (p=0.001). Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting was associated with higher rates of operating room extubation (70.0% vs 12.7%, P=0.001) and shorter hospital stays (4 vs 5 days, P=0.002).
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: