Stanislawski Ryszard, Aboul-Hassan Sleiman Sebastian, Marczak Jakub, Stankowski Tomasz, Peksa Maciej, Nawotka Marcin, Cichon Romuald
Department of Cardiac Surgery, MEDINET Heart Center Ltd, Nowa Sol, Poland.
Department of Cardiac Surgery, Trent Cardiac Centre, Nottingham University Hospital, Nottingham, UK.
J Card Surg. 2020 Dec;35(12):3412-3419. doi: 10.1111/jocs.15056. Epub 2020 Sep 28.
This study was designed to compare short-term and long-term clinical outcomes of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) and off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB) via median sternotomy in patients with single-vessel left anterior descending (LAD) artery disease.
In this retrospective study, 194-patients met the inclusion criteria and were divided into the MIDCAB group (n = 111) and OPCAB via median sternotomy group (n = 83). Short-term outcomes included: in-hospital mortality, perioperative myocardial infarction (MI), perioperative cerebrovascular adverse events (CAEs), chest drainage, reoperation for bleeding, duration of surgery, ventilation time, deep wound infection, packed red blood cell (pRBC) transfusion and duration of hospital stay. The long-term outcomes included: all-cause mortality, the incidence of MI and stroke, target vessel revascularization (TVR) and composite of mortality/MI/stroke. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match patients between the groups.
Before as well as after the PSM, no significant differences were observed between both groups in terms of in-hospital mortality, incidence of perioperative MI, incidence of CAEs, reoperation for bleeding, pRBC transfusions, deep wound infection and ventilation time. However, MIDCAB group had lower chest tube drainage and shorter hospital stay. On the other hand, OPCAB group had shorter time of surgery before as well as after PS matching. At 7-years, before and after PSM, freedom from all-cause mortality, MI, stroke, TVR as well as composite of mortality/MI/stroke were comparable between both groups.
Short-term as well as long-term outcomes of MIDCAB in terms of mortality, MI, stroke, and target vessel revascularization are satisfactory and as safe and effective as OPCAB via sternotomy.
本研究旨在比较单支冠状动脉左前降支(LAD)病变患者行微创直接冠状动脉旁路移植术(MIDCAB)与经正中胸骨切开非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术(OPCAB)的短期和长期临床结局。
在这项回顾性研究中,194例患者符合纳入标准,分为MIDCAB组(n = 111)和经正中胸骨切开OPCAB组(n = 83)。短期结局包括:住院死亡率、围手术期心肌梗死(MI)、围手术期脑血管不良事件(CAE)、胸腔引流、因出血再次手术、手术时间、通气时间、深部伤口感染、浓缩红细胞(pRBC)输注及住院时间。长期结局包括:全因死亡率、MI和卒中发生率、靶血管血运重建(TVR)以及死亡率/MI/卒中的复合结局。采用倾向评分匹配(PSM)在两组间匹配患者。
在PSM前后,两组在住院死亡率、围手术期MI发生率、CAE发生率、因出血再次手术、pRBC输注、深部伤口感染及通气时间方面均未观察到显著差异。然而,MIDCAB组胸腔引流较少且住院时间较短。另一方面,OPCAB组在PS匹配前后手术时间均较短。在7年时,PSM前后,两组在全因死亡率、MI、卒中、TVR以及死亡率/MI/卒中复合结局方面的无事件生存率相当。
MIDCAB在死亡率、MI、卒中和靶血管血运重建方面的短期和长期结局令人满意,与经胸骨切开的OPCAB一样安全有效。