Key result
Totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass is a feasible alternative to conventional bypass, with in-hospital mortality up to 2.1% and post-discharge graft patency of 92-100%.
Why the study?
Is totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass (TECAB) safe, feasible and effective in selected patients?
Systematic Review (n=724)
Yes
Is totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass (TECAB) safe, feasible and effective in selected patients?
TECAB represents a feasible and safe alternative to conventional coronary artery bypass in selected patients, offering excellent mid-term graft patency despite a significant learning curve.
Supports TECAB consideration in selected patients; extends observational evidence for minimally invasive CABG techniques.
A best evidence topic was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass (TECAB) is safe, effective and feasible. A total of 171 papers were found, of which eight represented the best evidence. The authors, date, journal, study type, population, main outcome measures and results are tabulated. The da Vinci robotic system was utilized in seven retrospective studies and one multicentre prospective trial, comprising 724 patients undergoing TECAB. Patient-related outcomes, including the incidence of major adverse cardiac events, graft patency and survival, were investigated. From the studies evaluated, TECAB appears to be safe operation with low complication rates and excellent early- and mid-term graft patencies. The incidence of internal thoracic artery injury was documented in four studies and ranged from 0 to 10%. Re-exploration for bleeding was necessary in 1-15% of patients. Conversion to open techniques was performed in 0-24% of cases. There was no in-hospital mortality in the majority of studies, but this reached 2.1% in a large series of 228 patients. Target-vessel reintervention rates varied between 0 and 12.1% according to the institutional experience. Pre- and post-discharge graft patencies were excellent at 93-100 and 92-100%, respectively. Intraoperative variables, such as time taken for internal thoracic artery harvest, anastomosis, cross-clamp, cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and the overall operation were as follows: internal thoracic artery harvest time (range 5-187 min), anastomosis time (range 6-82 min), cross-clamp time (range 30-223 min), CPB time (range 41-268 min) and operative time (range 84-600 min). TECAB is a technically demanding and time-consuming procedure associated with a significant learning curve. Proctoring and structured training programmes are currently supported by European and international societies to encourage wider uptake of the procedure. In conclusion, TECAB represents a feasible alternative to conventional coronary artery bypass in selected patients. It is associated with low morbidity and excellent mid-term graft patency. Larger, prospective and multicentre trials are required to assess the long-term and patient-reported outcomes of TECAB.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Acharya et al. (2012) conducted a systematic review in Coronary artery disease (n=724). Totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass (TECAB) vs. Conventional coronary artery bypass was evaluated on Major adverse cardiac events, graft patency, and survival. Totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass is a feasible alternative to conventional bypass, with in-hospital mortality up to 2.1% and post-discharge graft patency of 92-100%.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: