Safety and effectiveness of minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting in 143 patients: A propensity-score matching study
- VernacularTitle:143 例微创冠状动脉旁路移植术有效性和安全性的倾向性评分匹配研究
- Author:
Lin LIANG
1
;
Qingyu KONG
1
;
Jiaji LIU
1
;
wei XIAO
1
;
Xinliang CHEN
1
;
Xiaolong MA
1
;
Yu HUANG
1
;
Feng PAN
1
;
Danqing GENG
1
;
Liqun CHI
1
Author Information
1. Department of Cardiac Surgery, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing Institute of Heart, Lung and Blood Vessel Diseases, Beijing, 100029, P.R.China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Minimal invasive;
coronary artery bypass grafting;
propensity-score matching;
surgery
- From:
Chinese Journal of Clinical Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
2021;28(02):169-173
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To investigate the safety and effectiveness of minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (MICABG) through comparing the perioperative clinical effects of conventional surgery and MICABG. Methods A total of 543 patients in the single medical group of Beijing Anzhen Hospital who underwent beating coronary artery bypass grafting from January 2017 to September 2020 were collected, including 161 patients receiving MICABG (a minimally invasive group, 143 males and 18 females, aged 60.08±9.21 years), 382 patients receiving median thoracotomy (a conventional group, 284 males and 98 females, aged 61.68±8.81 years). The propensity score was used to match 143 patients in each of the two groups, and the perioperative data of the two groups were summarized and analyzed. Results There was no death, perioperative myocardial infarction or stroke in the minimally invasive group. Compared with the conventional group, the minimally invasive group had longer operation time (296.36±89.4 min vs. 217.80±50.63 min, P=0.000), less number of bypass grafts (2.86±1.03 vs. 3.17±0.78, P=0.005), shorter postoperative hospital stay (6.29±1.46 d vs. 6.78±2.61 d, P=0.031), less drainage on postoperative day 1 (339.57±180.63 mL vs. 441.92±262.63 mL, P=0.001) and lower usage rate of inotropic drugs (9.09% vs. 26.57%, P=0.001). There was no statistical difference between the two groups in postoperative ICU stay ventilator assistance time, blood transfusion rate, secondary thoracotomy rate, or use of mechanical equipment. Conclusion Reasonable clinical strategies can ensure the satisfactory overall safety of MICABG. In addition, it has the advantages of shorter postoperative hospital stay, less bleeding and smaller dosage of inotropic drugs.
