Abstract
Background: Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) is a well-established technique for treating multivessel coronary disease. There remains a paucity of discussion assessing the efficacy of HCR with respect to the timing of the surgical component relative to that of the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods: A retrospective review was undertaken of our prospectively collected database from January 2009 to December 2019. Of 395 HCR patients analyzed, we examined the outcomes of 109 pairs of propensity-matched patients who either underwent robotic-assisted minimally-invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) first, or who had PCI prior to surgery. Results: Thirty-day mortality was 0.25% (1 death) for the entire cohort. Mid-term survival for the total ‘MIDCAB-first’ group was 94.1% (17 deaths), not significantly different to that for the ‘PCI-first’ cohort (8 deaths, 92.7%), and this was also statistically comparable after propensity matching. Perioperative morbidity was not different between patient groups. Freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and the incidence of repeat revascularization was similar between the two groups at up to 11-year follow-up. Elevated serum creatinine independently predicted increased MACCE for all patients, irrespective of the sequence of HCR revascularization employed. Conclusions: In appropriately selected patients with multi-vessel coronary disease, HCR is associated with excellent short and longer-term results, irrespective of whether the MIDCAB or PCI procedure is performed first.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 425-435 |
Number of pages | 11 |
Journal | Annals of Cardiothoracic Surgery |
Volume | 13 |
Issue number | 5 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - 2024 |
Externally published | Yes |
Keywords
- Hybrid
- left anterior descending (LAD)
- minimally-invasive
- minimally-invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB)
- percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)