Related Experiment Videos
Minimally invasive direct coronary bypass versus cardiopulmonary technique: angiographic comparison
1Division of Cardiac Services, St. Charles Medical Center, Bend, Oregon, USA.
Background:
Studies comparing minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting (MIDCABG) with techniques using cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) are needed.
Methods:
Sixteen patients underwent single-vessel left internal thoracic artery-left anterior descending (LITA-LAD) MIDCABG through a left anterior thoracotomy, and 10 underwent multivessel bypass grafting that included a LITA-LAD, using CPB. Intraoperative completion angiography was performed on all LITA-LAD bypasses, and graded. One point each was given for: anastomotic patency, pedicle patency, intercostal obliteration, proper placement into the correct native coronary artery, and Thrombosis In Myocardial Ischemia grade III flow.
Results:
There were no intraoperative deaths or morbidities. LITA takedown averaged 49 +/- 18.6 minutes for MIDCABG and 16 +/- 2.0 minutes for CPB CABG (p < 0.05). LITA length did not differ between groups (15.3 +/- 1.2 cm for MIDCABG, 14.3 +/- 1.08 cm for CPB CABG). Ischemic arrest time was significantly less for the CPB group (13.3 +/- 8.3 minutes versus 24.5 +/- 9.6 minutes; p < 0.05). Average grade for MIDCABG LITA-LAD was 4.06 +/- 0.98 points versus 4.77 +/- 0.98 points for CPB LITA-LAD bypass (p = not significant).
Conclusions:
Intraoperative completion angiography is feasible and, when combined with a grading system, may facilitate the comparison of MIDCABG with standard techniques.