Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting: Current thoughts and prospects_Chinese Journal of Clinical Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Authors：

ZHOU Rongfeng ,  CHEN Yu

Department of Cardiac Surgery, Peking University People’s Hospital, Beijing, 100044, P.R.China;

Corresponding author：

CHEN Yu, Email: chenyu@pkuph.edu.cn

Keywords：

Coronary artery bypass grafting; minimally invasive surgery; current stage and prospect; commentary

DOI：

10.7507/1007-4848.202101029

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Since the advent of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), it has been one of the main ways to treat coronary heart disease. However, compared with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), it causes more trauma, complications and pain which discourage many patients. Recently, minimally invasive CABG has gradually become one of the main choices in some medical centers with the progress of technology and the development of surgical instruments. Compared with traditional CABG, minimally invasive CABG has the advantages of less trauma, less pain, faster recovery, lower perioperative mortality and less demand for blood transfusion. In this paper, we will mainly focus on the current stage and prospect of minimally invasive CABG.

Citation： ZHOU Rongfeng, CHEN Yu. Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting: Current thoughts and prospects. Chinese Journal of Clinical Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2021, 28(6): 623-626. doi: 10.7507/1007-4848.202101029 Copy

1.	Sabiston DC. The William F. Rienhoff, Jr. lecture. The coronary circulation. Johns Hopkins Med J, 1974, 134(6): 314-329.
2.	Favaloro RG. Saphenous vein autograft replacement of severe segmental coronary artery occlusion: Operative technique. Ann Thorac Surg, 1968, 5(4): 334-339.
3.	Green GE, Stertzer SH, Reppert EH. Coronary arterial bypass grafts. Ann Thorac Surg, 1968, 5(5): 443-450.
4.	Buffolo E, Andrade JC, Succi J, et al. Direct myocardial revascularization without cardiopulmonary bypass. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 1985, 33(1): 26-29.
5.	Benetti FJ, Naselli G, Wood M, et al. Direct myocardial revascularization without extracorporeal circulation. Experience in 700 patients. Chest, 1991, 100(2): 312-316.
6.	Lamy A, Devereaux P J, Prabhakaran D, et al. Five-year outcomes after off-pump or on-pump coronary-artery bypass grafting. N Engl J Med, 2016, 375(24): 2359-2368.
7.	Calafiore AM, Giammarco GD, Teodori G, et al. Left anterior descending coronary artery grafting via left anterior small thoracotomy without cardiopulmonary bypass. Ann Thorac Surg, 1996, 61(6): 1658-1663.
8.	Loulmet D, Carpentier A, d'Attellis N, et al. Endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting with the aid of robotic assisted instruments. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 1999, 118(1): 4-10.
9.	McGinn JT, Usman S, Lapierre H, et al. Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting: Dual-center experience in 450 consecutive patients. Circulation, 2009, 120(11 Suppl): S78-S84.
10.	Guida GA, Guida GA, Bruno VD, et al. Left thoracotomy approach for off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting surgery: 15 years of experience in 2500 consecutive patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, 2020, 57(2): 271-276.
11.	Babliak O, Demianenko V, Melnyk Y, et al. Complete coronary revascularization via left anterior thoracotomy. Innovations (Phila), 2019, 14(4): 330-341.
12.	Une D, Lapierre H, Sohmer B, et al. Can minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting be initiated and practiced safely?: A learning curve analysis. Innovations (Phila), 2013, 8(6): 403-409.
13.	Ruel M, Shariff MA, Lapierre H, et al. Results of the minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting angiographic patency study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2014, 147(1): 203-208.
14.	Nambiar P, Kumar S, Mittal CM, et al. Outcomes of bilateral internal thoracic arteries in minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting with analogy to the SYNTAX trial. Innovations (Phila), 2019, 14(3): 227-235.
15.	Snegirev MA, Paivin AA, Denisyuk DO, et al. Minimally invasive multivessel coronary bypass surgery: Angiographic patency data. J Card Surg, 2020, 35(3): 620-625.
16.	Guo MH, Wells GA, Glineur D, et al. Minimallyinvasive coronary surgery compared to sternotomy coronary artery bypass grafting: The MIST trial. Contemp Clin Trials, 2019, 78: 140-145.
17.	Rabindranauth P, Burns JG, Vessey TT, et al. Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting is associated with improved clinical outcomes. Innovations (Phila), 2014, 9(6): 421-426.
18.	Bayramoglu Z, Caynak B, Ezelsoy M, et al. Angiographic evaluation of graft patency in robotic-assisted coronary artery bypass surgery: 8 year follow-up. Int J Med Robot, 2014, 10(1): 121-127.
19.	Bonatti J, Wallner S, Winkler B, et al. Robotic totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting: Current status and future prospects. Expert Rev Med Devices, 2020, 17(1): 33-40.
20.	Leonard JR, Rahouma M, Abouarab AA, et al. Totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass surgery: A meta-analysis of the current evidence. Int J Cardiol, 2018, 261: 42-46.
21.	Yilmaz A, Robic B, Starinieri P, et al. A new viewpoint on endoscopic CABG: Technique description and clinical experience. J Cardiol, 2020, 75(6): 614-620.
22.	Guan Z, Zhang Z, Gu K, et al. Minimally invasive CABG or hybrid coronary revascularization for multivessel coronary diseases: Which is best? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart Surg Forum, 2019, 22(6): E493-E502.
23.	Rodriguez M, Ruel M. Minimally invasive multivessel coronary surgery and hybrid coronary revascularization: Can we routinely achieve less invasive coronary surgery? Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J, 2016, 12(1): 14-19.

1. Sabiston DC. The William F. Rienhoff, Jr. lecture. The coronary circulation. Johns Hopkins Med J, 1974, 134(6): 314-329.
2. Favaloro RG. Saphenous vein autograft replacement of severe segmental coronary artery occlusion: Operative technique. Ann Thorac Surg, 1968, 5(4): 334-339.
3. Green GE, Stertzer SH, Reppert EH. Coronary arterial bypass grafts. Ann Thorac Surg, 1968, 5(5): 443-450.
4. Buffolo E, Andrade JC, Succi J, et al. Direct myocardial revascularization without cardiopulmonary bypass. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 1985, 33(1): 26-29.
5. Benetti FJ, Naselli G, Wood M, et al. Direct myocardial revascularization without extracorporeal circulation. Experience in 700 patients. Chest, 1991, 100(2): 312-316.
6. Lamy A, Devereaux P J, Prabhakaran D, et al. Five-year outcomes after off-pump or on-pump coronary-artery bypass grafting. N Engl J Med, 2016, 375(24): 2359-2368.
7. Calafiore AM, Giammarco GD, Teodori G, et al. Left anterior descending coronary artery grafting via left anterior small thoracotomy without cardiopulmonary bypass. Ann Thorac Surg, 1996, 61(6): 1658-1663.
8. Loulmet D, Carpentier A, d'Attellis N, et al. Endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting with the aid of robotic assisted instruments. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 1999, 118(1): 4-10.
9. McGinn JT, Usman S, Lapierre H, et al. Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting: Dual-center experience in 450 consecutive patients. Circulation, 2009, 120(11 Suppl): S78-S84.
10. Guida GA, Guida GA, Bruno VD, et al. Left thoracotomy approach for off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting surgery: 15 years of experience in 2500 consecutive patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, 2020, 57(2): 271-276.
11. Babliak O, Demianenko V, Melnyk Y, et al. Complete coronary revascularization via left anterior thoracotomy. Innovations (Phila), 2019, 14(4): 330-341.
12. Une D, Lapierre H, Sohmer B, et al. Can minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting be initiated and practiced safely?: A learning curve analysis. Innovations (Phila), 2013, 8(6): 403-409.
13. Ruel M, Shariff MA, Lapierre H, et al. Results of the minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting angiographic patency study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2014, 147(1): 203-208.
14. Nambiar P, Kumar S, Mittal CM, et al. Outcomes of bilateral internal thoracic arteries in minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting with analogy to the SYNTAX trial. Innovations (Phila), 2019, 14(3): 227-235.
15. Snegirev MA, Paivin AA, Denisyuk DO, et al. Minimally invasive multivessel coronary bypass surgery: Angiographic patency data. J Card Surg, 2020, 35(3): 620-625.
16. Guo MH, Wells GA, Glineur D, et al. Minimallyinvasive coronary surgery compared to sternotomy coronary artery bypass grafting: The MIST trial. Contemp Clin Trials, 2019, 78: 140-145.
17. Rabindranauth P, Burns JG, Vessey TT, et al. Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting is associated with improved clinical outcomes. Innovations (Phila), 2014, 9(6): 421-426.
18. Bayramoglu Z, Caynak B, Ezelsoy M, et al. Angiographic evaluation of graft patency in robotic-assisted coronary artery bypass surgery: 8 year follow-up. Int J Med Robot, 2014, 10(1): 121-127.
19. Bonatti J, Wallner S, Winkler B, et al. Robotic totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting: Current status and future prospects. Expert Rev Med Devices, 2020, 17(1): 33-40.
20. Leonard JR, Rahouma M, Abouarab AA, et al. Totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass surgery: A meta-analysis of the current evidence. Int J Cardiol, 2018, 261: 42-46.
21. Yilmaz A, Robic B, Starinieri P, et al. A new viewpoint on endoscopic CABG: Technique description and clinical experience. J Cardiol, 2020, 75(6): 614-620.
22. Guan Z, Zhang Z, Gu K, et al. Minimally invasive CABG or hybrid coronary revascularization for multivessel coronary diseases: Which is best? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart Surg Forum, 2019, 22(6): E493-E502.
23. Rodriguez M, Ruel M. Minimally invasive multivessel coronary surgery and hybrid coronary revascularization: Can we routinely achieve less invasive coronary surgery? Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J, 2016, 12(1): 14-19.

Chinese Journal of Clinical Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting: Current thoughts and prospects

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content