Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting via a small thoracotomy versus off-pump: a case-matched study☆☆☆

Lapierre, Harry; Chan, Vincent; Sohmer, Benjamin; Mesana, Thierry G.; Ruel, Marc

doi:10.1016/j.ejcts.2011.01.066

Cited by 110 publications

(134 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

122

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Hospital length of stay (LOS), however, showed no significant difference between the two study groups. This is in contrast to other studies [28][29][30], which could be due to small sample size. But this variable might be dependent on institutional protocols and decision-making of physicians and surgeons as well [31].…”

Section: Comparison Of Minimally Invasive and Conventional Coronary Acontrasting

confidence: 51%

Assessment of Physical Activity by Wearable Technology During Rehabilitation After Cardiac Surgery: Explorative Prospective Monocentric Observational Cohort Study (Preprint)

Thijs¹,

Fresiello²,

Oosterlinck³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Comparison Of Minimally Invasive and Conventional Coronary Acontrasting

confidence: 51%

Assessment of Physical Activity by Wearable Technology During Rehabilitation After Cardiac Surgery: Explorative Prospective Monocentric Observational Cohort Study (Preprint)

Thijs¹,

Fresiello²,

Oosterlinck³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1 Other advantages include a decreased need for blood transfusion, lower surgical site infection rates, and earlier return to full physical function. 1,3,4 Associated complications include sternotomy conversion and development of left-sided pleural effusion. 1,3,5 Postoperative pain can be an issue during the initial hours, but it is transient, controllable, and significantly reduced by the third postoperative day; it is also associated with an overall improved postoperative pain picture with improved pulmonary functions.…”

Section: Minimally Invasive Multivessel Coronary Surgerymentioning

confidence: 99%

Minimally Invasive Multivessel Coronary Surgery and Hybrid Coronary Revascularization: Can We Routinely Achieve Less Invasive Coronary Surgery?

Rodriguez

Ruel

2016

Methodist DeBakey Cardiovascular Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Editor's Note: We are pleased to offer 1 credit of Continuing Medical Education for successfully completing an online quiz about this article. You may access the quiz at www.houstonmethodist.org/cme-online. AbstractCoronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is the gold standard in managing severe coronary artery disease. However, it is associated with prolonged recovery and potential complications, in part due to the invasiveness of the procedure. Less invasive CABG techniques attempt to improve the quality and quantity of life in the same way as surgical revascularization but with fewer complications.Minimally invasive coronary surgery (MICS) through a small thoracotomy allows for complete revascularization with good results in graft patency. Perioperative mortality is low, and there is decreased need for blood transfusion, lower surgical site infection rates, and an earlier return to full physical function. Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) attempts to combine the advantages of coronary artery bypass grafting with those of percutaneous coronary intervention. Several studies have shown that HCR provides better short-term outcomes with regard to decreased ventilation and ICU time, reduced need for blood transfusion, and shortened hospital stay. However, the rates for major adverse cardiovascular events and mortality are comparable to conventional CABG, except for patients with a high SYNTAX score who displayed increased mortality rates. There is also strong evidence of a higher need for repeat revascularization with HCR compared to CABG.Overall, MICS and HCR appear to be viable alternatives to conventional CABG, offering a less invasive approach to coronary revascularization, which may be especially beneficial to high-risk patients. This article discusses approaches that deliver the advantages of minimally invasive surgical revascularization that can be adapted by surgeons with minimal investment with regards to training and infrastructure.MDCVJ | XII (1) 2016 15 houstonmethodist.org/debakey-journal With MICS-CABG, complete myocardial revascularization is achievable in more than 95% of cases 1 since the technique allows access to the anterior, lateral, and inferior walls of the heart with or without use of CPB. Perioperative mortality is low at 1.3%. 1Other advantages include a decreased need for blood transfusion, lower surgical site infection rates, and earlier return to full physical function.1,3,4 Associated complications include sternotomy conversion and development of left-sided pleural effusion. 1,3,5 Postoperative pain can be an issue during the initial hours, but it is transient, controllable, and significantly reduced by the third postoperative day; it is also associated with an overall improved postoperative pain picture with improved pulmonary functions. 6,7 Notably, unlike sternotomy patients, MICS-CABG patients have no physical restriction postoperatively, which leads to improved independence. Even though MICS-CABG is more technically demanding, its anastomotic patency results were validated to...

show abstract

“…In MICABG,even though left anterior thoracotomy provided direct access to LAD through which anastomosis of LIMA -LAD was easy , harvesting lima through the small incision was very tedious and time consuming in the initial phase. However,according to Lapierre et al , the operation appears at least as safe as OPCAB, and associated with shorter hospital length of stay, less wound infections, and faster postoperative recovery than OPCAB 6 In the initial part of our study, because of lack of specialized instruments, minimally invasive surgeries were performed through regular instruments because of which the cross clamp time and bypass time were longer. Of the 30cases, the initial 20cases were performed with regular instruments.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Audit of Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery – An Initial Experience of 30 Cases At Our Institute

Kulkarni¹,

Jain²,

Sundeep³

et al. 2016

IOSR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting via a small thoracotomy versus off-pump: a case-matched study☆☆☆

Abstract: MICS CABG is a valuable alternative for patients in need of multivessel CABG. The operation appears at least as safe as OPCAB, and associated with shorter hospital length of stay, less wound infections, and faster postoperative recovery than OPCAB.

Cited by 110 publications

References 14 publications

Assessment of Physical Activity by Wearable Technology During Rehabilitation After Cardiac Surgery: Explorative Prospective Monocentric Observational Cohort Study (Preprint)

Assessment of Physical Activity by Wearable Technology During Rehabilitation After Cardiac Surgery: Explorative Prospective Monocentric Observational Cohort Study (Preprint)

Minimally Invasive Multivessel Coronary Surgery and Hybrid Coronary Revascularization: Can We Routinely Achieve Less Invasive Coronary Surgery?

An Audit of Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery – An Initial Experience of 30 Cases At Our Institute

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About