Key result
Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting yielded comparable postoperative complications and a trend toward shorter postoperative length of stay (P<0.071) versus conventional sternotomy.
Why the study?
Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting offers a new paradigm in coronary revascularization, but outcomes compared with conventional median sternotomy CABG needed evaluation within a growing minimally invasive program in Singapore.
Does minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting improve postoperative outcomes compared to conventional median sternotomy CABG in a low-risk Asian cohort?
Cohort (n=222)
No
Does minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting improve postoperative outcomes compared to conventional median sternotomy CABG in a low-risk Asian cohort?
p-value: p=<0.071
MICS CABG is a safe and effective alternative to conventional median sternotomy CABG in a low-risk Asian cohort, offering comparable clinical outcomes with a trend toward shorter hospital stays.
MICS CABG shows comparable safety and shorter stay trend; leaves open confirmation via randomized trials before wider adoption.
INTRODUCTION: Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (MICS CABG) offers a new paradigm in coronary revascularization. This study aims to compare the outcomes of MICS CABG with those of conventional median sternotomy CABG (MS CABG) within a growing minimally invasive cardiac surgical program in Singapore. METHODS: Propensity matching produced 111 patient pairs who underwent MICS CABG or MS CABG between January 2009 and February 2020 at the National University Heart Centre, Singapore. Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass surgery patients were matched to single- or double-graft MS CABG patients (Group 1). Multivessel MICS CABG patients were matched to MS CABG patients with equal number of grafts (Group 2). RESULTS: Overall, MICS CABG patients experienced shorter postoperative length of stay (P<0.071). In Group 2, procedural duration (P<0.001) was longer among MICS CABG patients, but it did not translate to adverse postoperative events. Postoperative outcomes, including 30-day mortality, reopening for bleeding, new onset atrial fibrillation as well as neurological, pulmonary, renal, and infectious complications were comparable between MICS and MS CABG groups. CONCLUSION: MICS CABG is a safe and effective approach for surgical revascularization of coronary artery disease and trends toward a reduction in hospital stay.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ong et al. (2024) conducted a cohort in Coronary artery disease (n=222). Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (MICS CABG) vs. Conventional median sternotomy CABG (MS CABG) was evaluated on Postoperative length of stay (p=<0.071). Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting yielded comparable postoperative complications and a trend toward shorter postoperative length of stay (P<0.071) versus conventional sternotomy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: