Retrospective cohort study of early and mid-term results of HCR and MICS-CABG in coronary artery disease patients with low ejection fraction and non diabetes mellitus
10.3760/cma.j.cn112434-20211112-00359
- VernacularTitle:HCR与MICS-CABG在低射血分数非糖尿病冠心病患者的早中期疗效回顾性队列研究
- Author:
Hongliang LIANG
1
;
Diancai ZHAO
;
Kaijie WANG
;
Pengfei JI
;
Weixun DUAN
;
Wei YI
;
Xiaochao DONG
;
Tao CHEN
;
Shiqiang YU
;
Jincheng LIU
Author Information
1. 西京医院心血管外科，西安 710032
- Keywords:
Multivessel coronary artery disease;
Minimally invasive;
Hybrid coronary revascularization;
Coronary artery bypass grafting
- From:
Chinese Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
2022;38(12):757-761
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the early and mid-term results of hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) and minimally invasive multivessel coronary artery bypass grafting (MICS-CABG) in coronary artery disease patients with low left ventricular ejection fraction and non diabetes mellitus, and to explore the indication of HCR and MICS-CABG.Methods:A retrospective cohort analysis of HCR and MICS-CABG cases with preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction less than 0.40, and without diabetes mellitus were conducted in Xijing Hospital from January 2015 to December 2019. 36 cases in HCR group and 17 cases in MICS group were included in this study. For HCR procedure, minimally invasive left internal mammary artery(LIMA) to the left anterior descending artery (LAD) bypass surgery were performed, and followed by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to treat non LAD lesion 1 to 4 weeks later. MICS-CABG procedure was performed through left anterior small thoracotomy minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting for multiple diseased vessels.Results:The preoperative SYNTAX score in MICS group was significantly higher than that in HCR group ( P<0.05). There was no perioperative death in both groups. Troponin I, postoperative drainage volume, blood transfusion volume and ventilator ventilation time in MICS group were significantly higher than those in HCR group ( P<0.05). After 12 months follow-up, no patient died in both groups. Furthermore, all LIMA grafts were patency. The stenosis rate of drug-eluting stents in HCR group was similar to that of great saphenous vein grafts in MICS group. LVEF and left ventricular end diastolic diameter of both groups were significantly improved 12 months after operation ( P<0.05). Conclusion:HCR and MICS-CABG are minimally invasive and safe treatment for multivessel coronary artery disease patients with low ejection fraction and non diabetese mellitus. The early and mid-term therapeutic effects are satisfactory. If coronary artery lesions other than LAD are suitable for PCI, HCR should be the preferred treatment.
