Dataset Information

Review of Contemporary Techniques for Minimally Invasive Coronary Revascularization.

ABSTRACT: Minimally invasive coronary revascularization techniques aim to avoid median sternotomy with its associated complications, while facilitating recovery and maintaining the benefits of surgical revascularization. The 3 most common procedures are minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting, totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass, and hybrid coronary revascularization. For a variety of reasons, including cost and technical difficulty, not many centers are routinely performing minimally invasive coronary revascularization. Nevertheless, many studies have assessed the safety and efficacy of each of these procedures in different clinical contexts. Thus far results have been promising, and with the evolution of procedural techniques, these approaches have the potential to redefine coronary revascularization in the future. This review highlights the current state of minimally invasive coronary revascularization techniques by exploring their benefits, identifying barriers to their adoption, and discussing future potential paradigms.

SUBMITTER: Fatehi Hassanabad A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8217892 | biostudies-literature | 2021 May-Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Review of Contemporary Techniques for Minimally Invasive Coronary Revascularization.

Fatehi Hassanabad Ali A Kang Jimmy J Maitland Andrew A Adams Corey C Kent William D T WDT

Innovations (Philadelphia, Pa.) 20210501 3

Minimally invasive coronary revascularization techniques aim to avoid median sternotomy with its associated complications, while facilitating recovery and maintaining the benefits of surgical revascularization. The 3 most common procedures are minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting, totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass, and hybrid coronary revascularization. For a variety of reasons, including cost and technical difficulty, not many centers are routinely performing minimally inv ...[more]

PMID: 34081874

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective: Renal dysfunction and acute renal failure after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are among the main causes of increased mortality and morbidity. A sternum-sparing concept of minimally invasive total coronary revascularization via anterior minithoracotomy (TCRAT) was introduced with promising early and midterm outcomes in multivessel coronary artery disease. There are limited data regarding renal complications in patients undergoing the TCRAT technique. The present study analyzed renal outcomes in TCRAT compared to CABG via full median sternotomy (FS). Methods: We analyzed the records of 227 consecutive TCRAT patients (from September 2021 to June 2023) and 228 consecutive FS patients (from January 2017 to December 2018) who underwent nonemergent CABG. Following propensity score matching, preoperative baseline characteristics-including age, sex, diabetes mellitus, arterial hypertension, left ventricular ejection fraction, EuroSCORE II, preoperative serum creatinine, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), serum urea, and pre-existing chronic renal insufficiency-were comparable between the TCRAT (n = 170) and the FS group (n = 170). The examined postoperative renal parameters and complications were serum creatinine, eGFR, and serum urea on the first postoperative day. Moreover, serum creatinine, eGFR and serum urea at the time of discharge, postoperative ARF, and hemodialysis were investigated. Additionally, the duration of operation, CPB time, aortic cross-clamp time, ICU and hospital stay, ECMO support, rethoracotomy and in-hospital mortality were analyzed. The parameters were compared between groups using a Student's t-test or Mann-Whitney U test. Results: The duration of operation (332 ± 66 vs. 257 ± 61 min; p < 0.05), CPB time (161 ± 40 vs. 116 ± 38 min; p < 0.05), and aortic cross-clamp time (100 ± 31 vs. 76 ± 26; p < 0.05) were longer in the TCRAT group. ICU (1.8 ± 2.2 vs. 2.9 ± 3.6 days; p < 0.05) and hospital (10.4 ± 7.6 vs. 12.4 ± 7.5 days; p < 0.05) stays were shorter in the TCRAT group. There were no differences between groups with regard to the renal parameters examined. Conclusions: Despite a prolonged duration of operation, CPB time, and aortic cross-clamp time when using the TCRAT technique, no increase in renal complications were found. In addition, ICU and hospital stays in the TCRAT group were shorter compared to CABG via full median sternotomy.

Dataset Information

Review of Contemporary Techniques for Minimally Invasive Coronary Revascularization.

Publications

Review of Contemporary Techniques for Minimally Invasive Coronary Revascularization.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets