Key result
Da Vinci robot-assisted BIMA grafting significantly reduced primary cardiovascular and renal endpoints at six months compared to conventional sternotomy (22.7% vs. 54.5%; p=0.03).
Why the study?
Studies investigating the clinical outcome of da Vinci robot-assisted BIMA grafting in CABG surgery were extremely limited.
Does da Vinci robot-assisted BIMA grafting reduce cardiovascular and renal endpoints in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease compared to conventional sternotomy?
Cohort (n=44)
Does da Vinci robot-assisted BIMA grafting reduce cardiovascular and renal endpoints in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease compared to conventional sternotomy?
Absolute Event Rate: 22.7% vs 54.5%
p-value: p=0.03
Robot-assisted BIMA grafting appears safe and may reduce short-term renal events compared to conventional sternotomy, though it requires significantly longer operation times.
May support robot-assisted BIMA in select patients; leaves open need for randomized confirmation before practice change.
Studies are extremely limited for the investigation of the clinical outcome of da Vinci robot-assisted bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) grafting in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery. This study aimed to explore the short-term outcome of da Vinci robot-assisted BIMA grafting through the left pleural space. Relevant data were collected from patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease receiving two kinds of CABG: a group of patients receiving da Vinci robot-assisted CABG with BIMA grafting, and another group of patients receiving sternotomy CABG with BIMA grafting. Primary endpoints, which included cardiovascular and renal endpoints, were analyzed between the groups using the chi-square test, analysis of variance test, and Kaplan–Meier analysis. Compared with the conventional group (n = 22), the robotic group (n = 22) had a significantly longer operation time (12.7 ± 1.7 vs. 8.5 ± 1.5 hours; p < 0.01) and a marginally lower mean of serum creatinine at baseline (1.2 ± 0.3 vs. 2.0 ± 1.7 mg/dL; p = 0.04). Primary endpoints (5, 22.7% vs. 12, 54.5%; p = 0.03) and renal endpoints (1, 4.5% vs. 7, 31.8%; p = 0.02) at six months were significantly reduced in the robotic group compared with the conventional group. There were no differences in cardiovascular endpoints at six months between the groups (1, 4.5% vs. 0; p = 1.00). The data showed that da Vinci robot-assisted BIMA grafting was safe, with equal cardiovascular events and lowered renal events at six months, as compared to conventional sternotomy BIMA grafting, despite the longer procedure time. The short-term study suggests that da Vinci robot-assisted BIMA grafting may be considered a favorable surgical option for patients with severe coronary artery disease.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wu et al. (2019) conducted a cohort in multi-vessel coronary artery disease (n=44). da Vinci robot-assisted BIMA grafting vs. conventional sternotomy BIMA grafting was evaluated on Composite of cardiovascular and renal endpoints (p=0.03). Da Vinci robot-assisted BIMA grafting significantly reduced primary cardiovascular and renal endpoints at six months compared to conventional sternotomy (22.7% vs. 54.5%; p=0.03).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: