Objective To compare the mid- and long-term efficacy of minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (MICS) versus conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Methods This study analyzed 679 patients with coronary heart disease treated in the Minimally Invasive Heart Center of Beijing Anzhen Hospital from 2015 to 2019, including 532 males and 147 females with an average age of 61.16 years. A total of 281 patients underwent MICS (a MICS group) and 398 patients underwent conventional CABG (a CABG group). The clinical data of the patients in the two groups were analyzed. ResultsThe average operation time was longer (P<0.001), the total hospital stay was shorter (P<0.001), and the amount of drainage 24 h after the operation was less (P=0.029) in the MICS group. There was no statistical difference in the incidence of perioperative complications between the two groups. The median follow-up time was 2.68 years. The follow-up results showed that the total incidence of cumulative main adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events in the CABG group was higher at 2 years (6.2% vs. 3.8%) and 4 years (9.3% vs. 7.6%), but the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). There was no statistical difference in 2- or 4-year all-cause death between the two groups (3.5% vs. 2.8%, 5.6% vs. 2.8%, P>0.05). At the same time, there was no statistical difference in the incidence of myocardial infarction, stroke or revascularization between the two groups (P>0.05). ConclusionCompared with conventional CABG, MICS can achieve satisfactory mid- and long-term outcomes.
ObjectiveTo compare and analyze the postoperative quality of life in patients after minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (MICABG) and conventional median thoracotomy off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (OPCABG). MethodsFrom November 2015 to January 2018, 94 patients who underwent MICABG in the Peking University Third Hospital were included in the MICABG group. During the same period 441 patients who received OPCABG were included in the OPCABG group. The patients were matched by using propensity score matching method with a ratio of 1∶1. The quality of life was compared between two groups at 1 month, 6 months and 12 months after the surgery using SF-36 scale. ResultsA total of 82 patients were matched for each group. In the MICABG group, there were 66 males and 16 females with a mean age of 62.6±8.2 years. In the OPCABG group, there were 67 males and 15 females with a mean age of 63.2±13.2 years. One month after the operation, the physical health assessment (PCS) and mental health assessment (MCS) of the MICABG group were higher than those of the OPCABG group (50.3±10.6 points vs. 46.1±10.3 points, P=0.011; 59.5±9.3 points vs. 54.2±11.0 points, P=0.002). Scores of these following five dimensions: general health, physical functioning (PF), role-physical, social functioning (SF), role-emotion in the MICABG group were higher than those in the OPCABG group, while the score of body pain was inferior to that in the OPCABG group, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). Six months after the surgery, the PCS and MCS of the two groups were not statistically different (80.0±13.1 points vs. 77.8±12.4 points, P=0.271; 81.6±13.5 points vs. 80.4±11.2 points, P=0.537). However, the scores of PF and SF in the MICABG group were still higher than those in the OPCABG group (P<0.05). Twelve months after the surgery, there was no statistical difference in the score of each dimension between the two groups (P>0.05). ConclusionThe improvement of quality of life within 6 months after MICABG is better than that of OPCABG, and it is similar between the two groups at 12 months after the surgery, indicating that MICABG has a certain effect of improving the short-term quality of life after the surgery, and the long-term quality of life is comparable to conventional surgery.
Objective To compare the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (MICS CABG) and traditional CABG in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and diabetes mellitus (DM). Methods From 2019 to 2021, the patients who received CABG by the same medical group in the Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery Center of Anzhen Hospital were retrospectively enrolled. According to the surgery methods, the patients were divided into two groups: a MICS CABG group and a conventional group. The perioperative and postoperative follow-up data of patients were collected. The main observation results included all cause death events, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular, revascularization, and adverse wound healing. Results According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 140 patients were enrolled, including 66 patients in the MICS CABG group (56 males and 10 females, aged 61.83±8.94 years), and 74 patients in the conventional group (55 males and 19 females, aged 58.61±8.26 years). Compared with the conventional group, patients in the MICS CABG group had longer median surgical time (4.50 h vs. 4.00 h, P=0.005), less intraoperative bleeding (600.00 mL vs. 700.00 mL, P=0.020), and a lower rate of secondary debridement and suturing of surgical wounds (4.5% vs. 16.2%, P=0.023). The median follow-up time was 2.54 years. There was no statistically significant difference in the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (7.6% vs. 5.4%), all-cause mortality (0 vs. 0), myocardial infarction (3.0% vs. 2.7%), cerebrovascular events (4.5% vs. 2.7%), and revascularization (0 vs. 0) between the two groups of patients during the postoperative follow-up (P>0.05). Conclusion MICS CABG can achieve the same revascularization effect as traditional CABG in patients with CHD and DM. MICS CABG can effectively reduce adverse clinical outcomes or complications such as adverse chest wound healing and slow postoperative recovery of body function in patients with DM.