Facilitated anastomosis using a reverse thermo-sensitive polymer for temporary coronary occlusion in minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) surgery

2010 ◽  
Vol 58 (S 01) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Rastan ◽  
T Noack ◽  
D Holzhey ◽  
J Seeburger ◽  
S Lehmann ◽  
...  
2005 ◽  
Vol 53 (S 01) ◽  
Author(s):  
S Jacobs ◽  
V Falk ◽  
D Holzhey ◽  
F Mohr

2004 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. E533-E534 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy P. Martens ◽  
Marco M. Hefti ◽  
Robert Kalimi ◽  
Craig R. Smith ◽  
Michael Argenziano

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 042 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehmet Ezelsoy ◽  
Baris Caynak ◽  
Muhammed Bayram ◽  
Kerem Oral ◽  
Zehra Bayramoglu ◽  
...  

<strong>Background</strong>: Minimally invasive bypass grafting surgery has entered the clincal routine in several centers around the world, with an increasing popularity in the last decade. In our study, we aimed to make a comparison between minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting surgery and conventional bypass grafting surgery in isolated proximal left anterior descending artery (LAD) lesions. <br /><strong>Methods</strong>: Between January 2004 and December 2011, patients with proximal LAD lesions, who were treated with robotically assisted minimally invasive coronary artery bypass surgery and conventional bypass surgery, were included in the study. In Group 1, coronary bypass with cardiopulmonary bypass and complete sternotomy were applied to 35 patients and in Group 2, robotically assisted minimally invasive bypass surgery was applied to 35 patients. The demographic, preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative data were collected retrospectively.<br /><strong>Results</strong>: The mean follow-up time of the conventional bypass group was 5.7 ± 1.7 years, whereas this ratio was 7.3 ±1.3 in the robotic group. There was no postoperative transient ischemic attack (TIA), wound infection, mortality, or need for intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) in any of the patients. In the conventional bypass group, blood transfusion and ventilation time were significantly higher (P &lt; .05) than in the robotic group. The intensive care unit (ICU) stay and hospital stay were remarkably shorter in the robotic group <br />(P &lt; .01). The postoperative pneumonia rate was significantly higher (20%) in the conventional bypass group <br />(P &lt; .01). Postoperative day 1 pain score was higher in the robotic group (P &lt; .05), however, postoperative day 3 pain score in the conventional bypass group was higher (P &lt; .05). Graft patency rate was 88.6% in the conventional bypass group whereas this ratio was 91.4% in the robotic bypass group, which was not clinically significant (P &gt; .05).<br /><strong>Conclusion</strong>: In isolated proximal LAD stenosis, robotic assisted minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting surgery requires less blood products, is associated with shorter ICU and hospital stay, and lesser pain in the early postoperative period in contrast to conventional surgery. The result of our studies, which showed similarities to the past studies, lead us to recognize the importance of minimally invasive interventions and the need to perform them more frequently in the future.


1996 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-116
Author(s):  
Eugene KW Sim ◽  
Rodney Landreneau ◽  
Peter MY Goh ◽  
Christopher Chew ◽  
Ng Wai Lin ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Grischa Hoffmann ◽  
Christine Friedrich ◽  
Katharina Huenges ◽  
Rainer Petzina ◽  
Astrid-Mareike Vogt ◽  
...  

Abstract Background High-risk patients with multivessel disease (MVD) including a complex stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary may not be ideal candidates for guideline compliant therapy by coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) regarding invasiveness and perioperative complications. However, they may benefit from minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) grafting and hybrid revascularization (HCR). Methods A logistic European system for cardiac operative risk evaluation score (logES) >10% defined high risk. In high-risk patients with MVD undergoing MIDCAB or HCR, the incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) after 30 days and during midterm follow-up was evaluated. Results Out of 1,250 patients undergoing MIDCAB at our institution between 1998 and 2015, 78 patients (logES: 18.5%; age, 76.7 ± 8.6 years) met the inclusion criteria. During the first 30 days, mortality and rate of MACCE were 9.0%; early mortality was two-fold overestimated by logES. Complete revascularization as scheduled was finally achieved in 64 patients (82.1%). Median follow-up time reached 3.4 (1.2–6.5) years with a median survival time of 4.7 years. Survival after 1, 3, and 5 years was 77, 62, and 48%. Conclusion In high-risk patients with MVD, MIDCAB is associated with acceptable early outcome which is better than predicted by logES. Taking the high-risk profile into consideration, midterm follow-up showed satisfying results, although scheduled HCR was not realized in a relevant proportion. In selected cases of MVD, MIDCAB presents an acceptable alternative for high-risk patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document