Key result
Minimally invasive multivessel CABG demonstrates safety and efficacy with ~93% mid-term survival.
Why the study?
Coronary artery bypass grafting remains invasive, motivating the need to evaluate immediate and mid-term outcomes of multivessel minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting to optimize surgical results.
Does multivessel minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting provide safe and effective revascularization in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease?
Cohort (n=500)
No
Does multivessel minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting provide safe and effective revascularization in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease?
Multivessel minimally invasive CABG via left minithoracotomy on a beating heart is safe and effective, demonstrating excellent mid-term survival and low perioperative complication rates.
Observational data support minimally invasive multivessel CABG; leaves open randomized confirmation before practice change.
No abstract yet. The journal hasn't published one we can show.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ziankou et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Coronary heart disease with multivessel lesions (n=500). Minimally invasive multivessel coronary artery bypass grafting (MICS CABG) was evaluated on 30-day all-cause mortality. Minimally invasive multivessel coronary artery bypass grafting demonstrated safety and efficacy, with a 30-day mortality of 0.6% and a 4.8-year cumulative survival rate of 93.4%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: