Scholarlink

Background <p>Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass techniques are increasingly adopted to reduce surgical trauma and enhance recovery. This study aimed to compare early clinical outcomes of endoscopic-assisted minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (EA-MIDCAB)—predominantly via a periareolar incision—with conventional full sternotomy coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.</p> Methods <p>We retrospectively analyzed 393 patients diagnosed with multivessel coronary artery disease who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) between February 2021 and May 2025. Of these, 332 underwent endoscopic-assisted minimally invasive direct CABG (EA-MIDCAB), and 61 underwent conventional full sternotomy CABG. Baseline characteristics, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, and complication rates were compared between groups. Statistical analyses were performed using appropriate tests, with significance defined as <i>p</i> &lt; 0.05.</p> Results <p>Baseline characteristics and coronary stenosis distribution were comparable between groups. EA-MIDCAB patients demonstrated significantly lower cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) usage (11.1% vs. 83.6%, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), reduced red blood cell transfusion requirements (0.82 vs. 1.56 pints, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), and fewer graft conduits (≥ 4 conduits: 0.6% vs. 19.2%, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). Despite a higher prevalence of diabetes and hypertension, short-term outcomes—including mortality, renal dysfunction, and postoperative myocardial infarction—were similar between the two groups.</p> Conclusions <p>EA-MIDCAB offers a safe and effective alternative to full sternotomy CABG for multivessel coronary artery disease, with reduced surgical trauma and transfusion needs.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Surgical outcomes of EA-MIDCAB vs. full sternotomy CABG in multi-vessel coronary artery disease: a retrospective cohort study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月17日

查看全文
  • Hemn Abdulrahman Abdullah,
  • Darya Nadir Saeed,
  • Sherzad Ali Ismael,
  • Marwan Abdullah Barzani,
  • Blnd Azad Ismail,
  • Marwan Tayyeb Tahir,
  • Abdullah Haider Flayeh

摘要

Background

Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass techniques are increasingly adopted to reduce surgical trauma and enhance recovery. This study aimed to compare early clinical outcomes of endoscopic-assisted minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (EA-MIDCAB)—predominantly via a periareolar incision—with conventional full sternotomy coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 393 patients diagnosed with multivessel coronary artery disease who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) between February 2021 and May 2025. Of these, 332 underwent endoscopic-assisted minimally invasive direct CABG (EA-MIDCAB), and 61 underwent conventional full sternotomy CABG. Baseline characteristics, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, and complication rates were compared between groups. Statistical analyses were performed using appropriate tests, with significance defined as p < 0.05.

Results

Baseline characteristics and coronary stenosis distribution were comparable between groups. EA-MIDCAB patients demonstrated significantly lower cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) usage (11.1% vs. 83.6%, p < 0.001), reduced red blood cell transfusion requirements (0.82 vs. 1.56 pints, p < 0.001), and fewer graft conduits (≥ 4 conduits: 0.6% vs. 19.2%, p < 0.001). Despite a higher prevalence of diabetes and hypertension, short-term outcomes—including mortality, renal dysfunction, and postoperative myocardial infarction—were similar between the two groups.

Conclusions

EA-MIDCAB offers a safe and effective alternative to full sternotomy CABG for multivessel coronary artery disease, with reduced surgical trauma and transfusion needs.