Key result
Minimally invasive cardiac surgery coronary artery bypass grafting yielded similar 30-day mortality (0.58% vs 0.58%, OR 1.000) and 6-month graft patency (91.97% vs 92.71%) compared to conventional off-pump surgery.
Why the study?
This study was designed to compare early outcomes associated with coronary artery bypass grafting for multi-vessel disease conducted using either minimally invasive or conventional off-pump techniques.
Does minimally invasive cardiac surgery coronary artery bypass grafting (MICS CABG) improve early outcomes compared to conventional off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCABG) in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease?
Cohort (n=344)
No
Does minimally invasive cardiac surgery coronary artery bypass grafting (MICS CABG) improve early outcomes compared to conventional off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCABG) in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease?
Odds Ratio: 1 (95% CI 0.063–15.988)
Absolute Event Rate: 0.58% vs 0.58%
Absolute Risk Reduction: 0%
p-value: p=1.000
MICS CABG is a safe and less invasive alternative to OPCABG for multi-vessel disease, offering similar early clinical outcomes and graft patency with faster recovery.
MICS CABG may yield comparable early outcomes to OPCABG; leaves open need for randomized trials before practice change.
BACKGROUND: This study was designed to compare early outcomes associated with coronary artery bypass grafting for multi-vessel disease conducted using either minimally invasive or conventional off-pump techniques.METHODS: From January 2017 through January 2021, 582 patients with multi-vessel lesion coronary artery disease underwent either minimally invasive cardiac surgery coronary artery bypass grafting (MICS CABG) or conventional off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCABG) treatment by our team at Anzhen Hospital. Patients in the MICS CABG group were propensity score-matched with those in the OPCABG at a 1:1 ratio (MICS CABG=172; OPCABG=172), using epidemiological data, preoperative clinical characteristics, and SYNTAX score as covariates. Perioperative outcomes and 6-month computed tomography angiography findings were compared between these groups.RESULTS: No significant differences between groups were observed with respect to 30-day postoperative mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke incidence. Surgical data indicated that the MICS CABG procedure was able to cover all three main arterial territories with a relatively low need for circulatory assistance. The MICS CABG procedure was associated with a longer operative duration, but was also associated with higher postoperative hemoglobin and activities of daily living index values as well as a shorter duration of postoperative hospitalization (P < 0.05). No differences in 6-month graft patency were observed between groups. CONCLUSIONS: MICS CABG is a safe, less invasive alternative to OPCABG when performing complete revascularization provided patients are properly selected, yielding similar in-hospital outcomes and 6-month graft patency rates together with an earlier return of physical function.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lin et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Multi-vessel coronary artery disease (n=344). Minimally invasive cardiac surgery coronary artery bypass grafting (MICS CABG) vs. Conventional off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCABG) was evaluated on 30-day mortality (OR 1.000, 95% CI 0.063-15.988, p=1.000). Minimally invasive cardiac surgery coronary artery bypass grafting yielded similar 30-day mortality (0.58% vs 0.58%, OR 1.000) and 6-month graft patency (91.97% vs 92.71%) compared to conventional off-pump surgery.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: