Abstract
Objectives
Minimally invasive CABG is making positive strides in the evolution of coronary artery bypass surgery. We carried out a retrospective study of the efficacy and outcomes of the usage of bilateral internal thoracic arteries in MICS CABG patients over a 6 year period using primary (MACCE) and secondary outcome measures and also carried out a subgroup analysis of patients with diabetes and methodology of revascularization, and with analogy to the SYNTAX trial of the relative risk.
Methods
Nine hundred and forty patients underwent multivessel MICS CABG via a left mini-thoracotomy from August 2011 to September 2017 and complete revascularization was done using the left internal thoracic artery–right internal thoracic artery Y (LITA–RITA Y) composite conduit. Efficacy and outcomes were evaluated by primary (MACCE) and secondary outcome measures including total length of stay, return to full physical activity, and quality of life. Propensity score matched analyses were carried out in diabetics, in the methodology of revascularization (MICS OPCABG vs. MICS ONCABG), and by comparison to the SYNTAX trial for relative risk. Mean follow-up was 2.9 years (maximum was 5.6 years).
Results
Out of the 940 patients, 843 (89.6%) were diabetic and 97 (10.4%) were nondiabetic. Average grafts were 3.2. There were 9 mortalities (0.9%). The average ICU and hospital stay was 40 ± 12 hours and 3.1 days. Ten patients (1.06%) required reintervention by angioplasty. A total of 99.3% patients were free from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) at follow-up. Mean follow-up was 33 months and 846 (90%) of the patients were followed up. Based on propensity score–matched groups, patients who had their surgery done by MICS ONCABG (beating heart technique) had greater mean number of grafts and hospital length of stay and had significantly longer ICU stay, extubation in OR and blood loss in comparison to patients who had their CABG done by the MICS OPCABG technique. The new technique has shown favorable risk reduction in comparison to both the arms of the SYNTAX trial.
Conclusions
The safety, efficacy and outcomes of minimally invasive CABG evaluated by primary (MACCE) and secondary outcomes and quality-of-life measures have been good in this study, especially in diabetics, and have shown results better than conventional CABG. The learning curve can be safely negotiated by using peripheral cardiopulmonary bypass assistance and comparison with the SYNTAX trial has shown a relative reduction in all-cause risk.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.