ABSTRACT
@#Objective To investigate the perioperative clinical effects and follow-up results of minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (MICS CABG) versus conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in thoracotomy. Methods The patients who received off-pump CABG in Beijing Anzhen Hospital from January 2017 to October 2021 were collected. Among them, the patients receiving MICS CABG performed by the same surgeon were divided into a minimally invasive group, and the patients receiving median thoracotomy were into a conventional group. By propensity score matching, preoperative data were balanced. Perioperative and postoperative follow-up data of the two groups were compared. Results A total of 890 patients were collected. There were 211 males and 28 females, aged 60.54±9.40 years in the minimally invasive group, and 487 males and 164 females, aged 62.31±8.64 years in the conventional group. After propensity score matching, there were 239 patients in each group. Compared with the conventional group, patients in the minimally invasive group had longer operation time, shorter drainage duration, less drainage volume on the first postoperative day, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and lower rate of positive inotropenic drugs use, while there was no statistical difference in the mean number of bypass grafts, ICU stay, ventilator-assisted time, blood transfusion rate or perioperative complications (P>0.05). During the median follow-up of 2.25 years, there was no statistical difference in major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, including all-cause death, stroke or revascularization between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusion Reasonable clinical strategies can ensure perioperative and mid-term surgical outcomes of MICS CABG not inferior to conventional CABG. In addition, MICS CABG has the advantages in terms of postoperative hospital stay, postoperative drainage volume, and rate of positive inotropic drugs use.
ABSTRACT
@#Objective To compare the mid- and long-term efficacy of minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (MICS) versus conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Methods This study analyzed 679 patients with coronary heart disease treated in the Minimally Invasive Heart Center of Beijing Anzhen Hospital from 2015 to 2019, including 532 males and 147 females with an average age of 61.16 years. A total of 281 patients underwent MICS (a MICS group) and 398 patients underwent conventional CABG (a CABG group). The clinical data of the patients in the two groups were analyzed. Results The average operation time was longer (P<0.001), the total hospital stay was shorter (P<0.001), and the amount of drainage 24 h after the operation was less (P=0.029) in the MICS group. There was no statistical difference in the incidence of perioperative complications between the two groups. The median follow-up time was 2.68 years. The follow-up results showed that the total incidence of cumulative main adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events in the CABG group was higher at 2 years (6.2% vs. 3.8%) and 4 years (9.3% vs. 7.6%), but the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). There was no statistical difference in 2- or 4-year all-cause death between the two groups (3.5% vs. 2.8%, 5.6% vs. 2.8%, P>0.05). At the same time, there was no statistical difference in the incidence of myocardial infarction, stroke or revascularization between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusion Compared with conventional CABG, MICS can achieve satisfactory mid- and long-term outcomes.
ABSTRACT
Objective:The perioperative and early follow-up data of the simultaneous hybrid CAS+ OPCABG and sequential CAS+ OPCABG were compared to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the simultaneous CAS+ OPCABG.Methods:A total of 26 patients with coronary heart disease complicated with carotid artery stenosis received CAS plus OPCABG hybrid surgery in our hospital from January 2020 to July 2021, among which 12 patients received simultaneous CAS+ OPCABG and 14 patients received staged sequential CAS+ OPCABG.The perioperative and postoperative follow-up data of 3 months were compared and analyzed.Results:There were no significant differences in the operation time, drainage on the first day after surgery, ventilator assisted time and ICU time between the two groups.The amount of intraoperative blood loss in the simultaneous group was more than that in the staged group, but no secondary thoracotomy occurred in both groups. The number of days in hospital after operation was significantly less in the simultaneous group. There was 1 case of perioperative cerebral infarction and 1 case of myocardial infarction in the staged group, but there was no statistical difference between the two groups. There was no new cerebral infarction in the two groups, carotid artery ultrasound stent was unobstructed, and there was no statistical difference in cardiac function grading and left ventricular ejection fraction 3 months after operation.Conclusion:Simultaneous CAS+ OPCABG surgery is safe and feasible, it is recommended as the first choice especially for patients with severe myocardial ischemiaor severe left main artery disease caused.How to reduce the risk of bleeding and alleviat carotid sinus reflex are major issues that need to be concerned.