Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass versus single internal thoracic artery grafting procedures for multivessel coronary artery disease: a single-center retrospective analysis.
Mohammad Kakoush, Amit Gordon, Ariel Farkash, Nadav Teich, Orr Sela, Dmitri Pevni, Tomer Ziv-Baran, Jonathan Kfir, Yanai Ben-Gal
{"title":"Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass versus single internal thoracic artery grafting procedures for multivessel coronary artery disease: a single-center retrospective analysis.","authors":"Mohammad Kakoush, Amit Gordon, Ariel Farkash, Nadav Teich, Orr Sela, Dmitri Pevni, Tomer Ziv-Baran, Jonathan Kfir, Yanai Ben-Gal","doi":"10.1186/s13019-025-03410-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare two surgical strategies for myocardial revascularization: one by a minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) and the other by a conventional full sternotomy coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We reviewed the early outcomes and overall survival of all the patients treated in our center by the above strategies during 2000-2011.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 1915 patients, 1752 underwent conventional CABG utilizing a single internal thoracic artery (ITA) graft and 163 underwent a MIDCAB procedure. In the former compared to the latter, the patients were older and the median EuroSCORE was higher. The prevalences were higher of diabetes mellitus, recent myocardial infarction, emergency procedures, the.usage of an intra-aortic balloon pump, redo operations, and peripheral vascular disease; and the prevalences lower of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and chronic renal failure. The median follow-up was 20 years. Early mortality (30 day) was greater in the conventional CABG group (3.6% vs. 0.6%, p = 0.042); and 10-, 15- and 20-year survival rates were lower: 55.1% vs. 76.7%, 37.1% vs. 63.7%, and 23.1% vs. 53.4%, respectively, p < 0.001. In an analysis that compared two matched groups of 134 patients each, early outcomes were similar, but late survival was lower following conventional CABG compared to MIDCAB after 10, 15 and 20 years: 64.7% vs. 74.6%, 44.7% vs. 64.1%, and 28.4% vs. 53.6% respectively, p = 0.004. In multivariable and univariate analysis, MIDCAB strategy compared to conventional single ITA CABG was associated with better late survival; the hazard ratio was 0.429 (95%CI 0.321-0.574, p < 0.001) for the whole cohort and 0.559 (95%CI: 0.376-0.831, p = 0.004), for the matched cohort.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to conventional CABG utilizing a single ITA, the MIDCAB procedure demonstrated early safety and long-term effectiveness for surgical myocardial revascularization of the left anterior descending artery.</p>","PeriodicalId":15201,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery","volume":"20 1","pages":"188"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11987435/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13019-025-03410-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To compare two surgical strategies for myocardial revascularization: one by a minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) and the other by a conventional full sternotomy coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).
Methods: We reviewed the early outcomes and overall survival of all the patients treated in our center by the above strategies during 2000-2011.
Results: Of 1915 patients, 1752 underwent conventional CABG utilizing a single internal thoracic artery (ITA) graft and 163 underwent a MIDCAB procedure. In the former compared to the latter, the patients were older and the median EuroSCORE was higher. The prevalences were higher of diabetes mellitus, recent myocardial infarction, emergency procedures, the.usage of an intra-aortic balloon pump, redo operations, and peripheral vascular disease; and the prevalences lower of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and chronic renal failure. The median follow-up was 20 years. Early mortality (30 day) was greater in the conventional CABG group (3.6% vs. 0.6%, p = 0.042); and 10-, 15- and 20-year survival rates were lower: 55.1% vs. 76.7%, 37.1% vs. 63.7%, and 23.1% vs. 53.4%, respectively, p < 0.001. In an analysis that compared two matched groups of 134 patients each, early outcomes were similar, but late survival was lower following conventional CABG compared to MIDCAB after 10, 15 and 20 years: 64.7% vs. 74.6%, 44.7% vs. 64.1%, and 28.4% vs. 53.6% respectively, p = 0.004. In multivariable and univariate analysis, MIDCAB strategy compared to conventional single ITA CABG was associated with better late survival; the hazard ratio was 0.429 (95%CI 0.321-0.574, p < 0.001) for the whole cohort and 0.559 (95%CI: 0.376-0.831, p = 0.004), for the matched cohort.
Conclusions: Compared to conventional CABG utilizing a single ITA, the MIDCAB procedure demonstrated early safety and long-term effectiveness for surgical myocardial revascularization of the left anterior descending artery.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery is an open access journal that encompasses all aspects of research in the field of Cardiology, and Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery. The journal publishes original scientific research documenting clinical and experimental advances in cardiac, vascular and thoracic surgery, and related fields.
Topics of interest include surgical techniques, survival rates, surgical complications and their outcomes; along with basic sciences, pediatric conditions, transplantations and clinical trials.
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery is of interest to cardiothoracic and vascular surgeons, cardiothoracic anaesthesiologists, cardiologists, chest physicians, and allied health professionals.