Minimally Invasive Coronary Bypass
1998; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; Volume: 98; Issue: 6 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1161/01.cir.98.6.495
ISSN1524-4539
AutoresLawrence I. Bonchek, Daniel J. Ullyot,
Tópico(s)Coronary Interventions and Diagnostics
ResumoHomeCirculationVol. 98, No. 6Minimally Invasive Coronary Bypass Free AccessEditorialPDF/EPUBAboutView PDFView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toFree AccessEditorialPDF/EPUBMinimally Invasive Coronary Bypass A Dissenting Opinion Lawrence I. Bonchek and Daniel J. Ullyot Lawrence I. BonchekLawrence I. Bonchek From the Mid-Atlantic Heart Institute at Lancaster General Hospital, Lancaster, Pa (L.I.B.), and Mills-Peninsula Hospitals, Burlingame, Calif (D.J.U.). and Daniel J. UllyotDaniel J. Ullyot From the Mid-Atlantic Heart Institute at Lancaster General Hospital, Lancaster, Pa (L.I.B.), and Mills-Peninsula Hospitals, Burlingame, Calif (D.J.U.). Originally published11 Aug 1998https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.98.6.495Circulation. 1998;98:495–497Minimally invasive techniques for coronary surgery are gaining increased attention, but not without debate. We recognize that in criticizing a new technique, it is necessary to have not only a firm opinion but also a willingness to be wrong; our purpose is to stimulate discussion and debate. Of course, it is difficult to argue against attempts to minimize the invasiveness of any procedure, but it is well to recall that the most obvious successes of minimally invasive surgery have involved technically simple operations, such as arthroscopy or cholecystectomy, which involve a minimum of precision and almost no sewing. The circumstances are different, however, when one attempts to apply the same theory and strategy to physiologically and technically complex cardiac operations.Advantages of Conventional CABGThe remarkable success of conventional CABG is due to the application of a standardized operation in a wide variety of settings to large numbers of patients with advanced disease by a vast cadre of trained, experienced surgeons who can offer the public an operation that is safe, effective, durable, reproducible, complete, versatile, and teachable and that, over time, offers cost savings because of the low incidence of complications and repeat revascularizations. (Randomized studies such as the RITA trial,1 which compare CABG with angioplasty, show higher initial costs for surgery but convergence of costs within 2 to 3 years because of the infrequency of repeat revascularizations in the surgical cohort.) These excellent outcomes after surgery depend on a number of critical components: uncompromising selection of the best sites for coronary anastomoses; careful management of unexpected circumstances, such as intramyocardial vessels; use of properly chosen, optimum conduits of exact length; avoidance of trauma to conduits and native coronary vessels; provision of optimum conditions for microvascular anastomoses; and performance of complete, multivessel revascularization. These maneuvers require adequate exposure, which remains a basic ingredient of good surgery. The median sternotomy is a versatile incision that provides exposure for all segments of the coronary arteries; allows palpation and direct inspection of the best sites for coronary and aortic anastomoses; permits careful, atraumatic, and rapid mobilization of both internal mammary arteries; and permits repair of cardiac valves and other structures without altering the basic surgical approach.Thus, the standard operation ensures the optimum conditions for achieving the best possible results with the widest margin of safety and has provided reproducible results in the hands of surgeons around the world.Minimally Invasive TechniquesWhat, then, can we say about the approaches that are being proposed as alternatives? The claims for the nonpump, beating-heart, MIDCAB procedure are that the incisions are better tolerated and are cosmetically more desirable than a full median sternotomy, that the morbidity of cannulation and cardiopulmonary bypass is avoided, and that the costs of equipment and personnel for cardiopulmonary bypass are eliminated. The claims for port-access surgery are that even with the use of the pump, incisional morbidity is lessened, recovery is faster, and costs are reduced because hospital stays are shorter.In reality, operations through small incisions are prolonged and are technically more difficult. Applicability is limited for mini-incisional and port-access CABG by common problems such as peripheral vascular disease, aortic regurgitation, and ischemic mitral regurgitation. Although it is possible that the novelty of MIDCAB surgery may divert some patients with isolated, proximal LAD disease from the interventional cardiologist, because interventions in the proximal LAD have the highest recurrence rate, it is also true that isolated IMA grafting to the LAD by standard techniques is a remarkably safe, simple, and rapid operation that requires only 75 to 85 minutes in most cases and that has a success rate of >95% graft patency.2 Contrast this with the MIDCAB procedure, which generally takes longer except in the hands of a few MIDCAB virtuosos3 and about which there are disturbing reports of early anastomotic failures that provoke early reoperations or PTCA,4 including some anastomotic occlusions that have occurred at high-profile, live, video teaching conferences despite use of modern stabilization techniques. As a result of the extensive learning curve, for which vulnerable patients pay the price, there have been recommendations for routine early angiography during the so-called learning phase,5 an additional expense for an operation purported to offer cost savings.Multiple prospective studies of CABG have shown that the superiority of surgical therapy over medical management in relief of angina and improved survival is related to the severity of disease and the completeness of revascularization. In other words, the benefit of surgery is greatest when patients with the most extensive coronary atherosclerosis and left ventricular dysfunction receive complete revascularization. Data from the BARI trial6 indicate that the most commonly performed surgical revascularization procedure in the United States is CABG in patients with 3-vessel disease. Fewer than 2% of STS Database patients have had single grafts. In the experience at Lancaster General Hospital, only 189 patients have received single grafts to the LAD during a 14-year experience in which 6485 patients required first-time isolated CABG. We must therefore ask whether the increasing numbers of patients undergoing single-vessel bypass with MIDCAB techniques are being completely revascularized. In both port-access and MIDCAB operations, limited exposure encourages and in some cases even mandates incomplete revascularization, as evidenced by recommendations of hybrid approaches that combine CABG with PTCA.7 Most surgeons have experience with and have been critical of situations in which patients who were judged by interventional cardiologists to have single-vessel disease before PTCA subsequently are found to require multiple bypass grafts when they are referred for CABG after failed PTCA. Will enthusiasm for the MIDCAB approach create a surgical version of this "tunnel-vision" phenomenon?CostThe purported cost savings of minimally invasive techniques are unsubstantiated, and there are many factors that actually increase cost, such as the expensive new devices associated with these procedures, the longer operating times, and the recommended studies to judge technical success. Any thoracic surgeon who has performed a mediastinal lymph node biopsy through a small anterior intercostal incision (Chamberlain procedure) knows that these incisions can be painful or may heal poorly in some patients and can occasionally be followed by lung hernias or chronic intercostal neuralgia.After surgery through small incisions, early discharge from the hospital and reduced incisional pain may result in earlier return to work, which may offset to some extent the higher equipment costs of many of these procedures. Nevertheless, it is now commonplace to discharge patients from the hospital on day 4 or occasionally day 3 after surgery, even after standard multivessel bypass operations. In most patients, the full sternotomy incision is well tolerated and heals firmly. In our experience with lower hemisternotomy for MIDCAB IMA-to-LAD grafts, there is only a modest decrease in patient discomfort and postoperative disability. Long-term studies with thoroughly documented follow-up of comparable patients will be needed to confirm that the early return to work associated with these new approaches cannot be explained simply by the current general trend toward rapid recovery.Public DemandOne of the arguments made for minimally invasive surgery is that the public demands it. This phenomenon is not surprising. Minimally invasive coronary bypass, with or without the pump, is being promoted to a poorly informed and gullible public in the United States, who are led to believe that these techniques are applicable to most cases, that the completeness of the procedure and the results are as good as with the standard operation, and that patients can expect little pain, few complications, and rapid return to their usual lifestyle. These misconceptions are encouraged by the companies that manufacture the specialized equipment necessary for these new procedures and by some hospitals and surgeons who advertise these techniques aggressively for competitive advantage. The public thus understandably expresses a desire for these procedures, because everyone would like to enjoy the benefits of surgery without the pain and inconvenience of actually undergoing surgery. The circle is completed when the public's desire provokes other surgeons to carry out these procedures not because of their own convictions that these are better techniques but because they must offer these approaches to maintain their competitive position in the marketplace. In doing so, they risk compromising the safety and effectiveness of conventional CABG, a "gold standard" that has been successful in vast numbers of patients and is certainly the most rigorously studied operation in surgical history. Minimally invasive coronary bypass seductively promises short-term benefits, with no proof as yet that it can match the long-term benefits of the standard operation, which are firmly established and thoroughly documented.8910ConclusionsWe must have good studies that directly compare minimally invasive surgery with the standard operation. Preliminary information is disturbing in regard to anastomotic failures, and we need reassurance that the standard operation is not being compromised in regard to case selection, conduit selection, completeness of revascularization, graft patency rates, and cost. It is not sufficient, for example, to show that the hospital cost for a single IMA graft to the LAD by the MIDCAB approach is less expensive in a selected group of patients than is a standard operation in another group. It is also necessary to show that the patients were similar in all the important clinical parameters, that they had an equivalent completeness of revascularization, and that the long-term results were comparable. In patients with multivessel disease, for whom port-access surgery or even, more recently, robotic surgery is being advocated, it is hard to believe that the entire strategic approach to the procedure is not being compromised by a desire to minimize invasiveness. The use of sequential arterial grafts with mammary and radial arteries has enhanced the ability of cardiac surgeons to complete a higher percentage of grafts with arterial conduits. It remains to be seen whether this salutary development can be duplicated with port-access surgery.Just because something can be done does not automatically mean that it should be done. We would also restate this axiom to say that just because something can be done by some surgeons does not mean that it should be done by all surgeons. The results obtained by some of the surgeons who have struggled to learn the techniques we are discussing will not necessarily be duplicated by others. Those who propose to alter the refined and highly evolved standard operation have the burden of proving that these new techniques not only are beneficial in the short term but also can be achieved by any competent surgeon without compromising the safety, durability, and sustained improvement that are well documented with the standard operation. We are waiting for the evidence.Selected Abbreviations and AcronymsCABG=coronary artery bypass graft surgeryIMA=internal mammary arteryLAD=left anterior descending coronary arteryMIDCAB=minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypassPTCA=percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplastyThe opinions expressed in this editorial are not necessarily those of the editors or of the American Heart Association.FootnotesCorrespondence to Lawrence I. Bonchek, MD, Surgical Director, Mid-Atlantic Heart Institute at Lancaster General Hospital, 555 N Duke St, PO Box 3555, Lancaster, PA 17604-3555. E-mail [email protected] References 1 Pocock SJ, Hendersen RA, Seed P, Treasure T, Hampton JR. Quality of life, employment status, and anginal symptoms after coronary angioplasty or bypass surgery: 3-year follow-up in the RITA trial. Circulation.1996; 94:135–142.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar2 Boylan MJ, Lytle BW, Loop FD, Taylor PC, Borsh JA, Goormastic M, Cosgrove DM. Surgical treatment of isolated left anterior descending coronary stenosis: comparison of left internal mammary artery and venous autograft at 18 to 20 years of followup. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg.1994; 107:657–662.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3 Calafiore AM, Teodori G, DiGiammarco G, Vitolla G, Contini M. Minimally invasive coronary artery surgery: the last operation. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg.1997; 9:305–311.MedlineGoogle Scholar4 Alessandrini F, Luciani N, Marchetti C, Guadino M, Posatti G. Early results with the minimally invasive thoracotomy for myocardial revascularization. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg.1997; 11:1081–1085.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5 Schaff HV, Cable DG, Rihal CS, Daly RC, Orszulak TA. Minimal thoracotomy for coronary artery bypass: value of immediate postprocedure graft angiography. Circulation. 1996;94(suppl I):I-5. Abstract.Google Scholar6 Writing Group for the BARI Investigators. Five-year clinical and functional outcome comparing bypass surgery and angioplasty in patients with multivessel coronary disease: a multicenter randomized trial. JAMA.1997; 277:715–721.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar7 Friedrich GJ, Bonatti J, Dapunt OE. Preliminary experience with minimally invasive coronary-artery bypass surgery combined with coronary angioplasty. N Engl J Med.1997; 336:1454–1455.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar8 Bonchek LI, Burlingame MW, Vazales BE, Lundy EF, Gassmann CJ. Applicability of noncardioplegic coronary bypass to high-risk patients. J Thorac Surg.1992; 53:1127–1129.CrossrefGoogle Scholar9 Lytle BW, Loop FD, Cosgrove DM, Ratliff NB, Easley K, Taylor PC. Long-term (5 to 12 years) serial studies of internal mammary artery and saphenous vein coronary bypass grafts. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg.1985; 89:248–258.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar10 Gersh BJ, Califf RM, Loop FD, Akins CW, Pryor DB, Takaro TC. Coronary bypass surgery in chronic stable angina. Circulation. 1989;79(6 pt 2):I-46–I-59.Google Scholar eLetters(0) eLetters should relate to an article recently published in the journal and are not a forum for providing unpublished data. Comments are reviewed for appropriate use of tone and language. Comments are not peer-reviewed. Acceptable comments are posted to the journal website only. Comments are not published in an issue and are not indexed in PubMed. Comments should be no longer than 500 words and will only be posted online. References are limited to 10. Authors of the article cited in the comment will be invited to reply, as appropriate. Comments and feedback on AHA/ASA Scientific Statements and Guidelines should be directed to the AHA/ASA Manuscript Oversight Committee via its Correspondence page. Sign In to Submit a Response to This Article Previous Back to top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited By Kang J, Song H, Lee S, Moon M, Kim H and Jo G (2014) Hybrid Coronary Revascularization Using Limited Incisional Full Sternotomy Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery in Multivessel Disease: Early Results, The Korean Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 10.5090/kjtcs.2014.47.2.106, 47:2, (106-110), Online publication date: 30-Apr-2014. Bang J, Kim J, Lee J, Kim J, Jung S, Choo S and Chung C (2012) Minimally Invasive Approaches Versus Conventional Sternotomy for Aortic Valve Replacement: A Propensity Score Matching Study, The Korean Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 10.5090/kjtcs.2012.45.2.80, 45:2, (80-84), Online publication date: 30-Apr-2012. Loganathan S, Nieh C, Emmert M, Woitek F, Martinez E, Muecke S, Lee C and Kofidis T (2010) Off-Pump versus On-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Procedures: Postoperative Renal Complications in an Asian Population, Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore, 10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.V39N2p112, 39:2, (112-117), Online publication date: 15-Feb-2010. Hueb W, Lopes N, Gersh B, Castro C, Paulitsch F, Oliveira S, Dallan L, Hueb A, Stolf N and Ramires J (2008) A randomized comparative study of patients undergoing myocardial revascularization with or without cardiopulmonary bypass surgery: The MASS III Trial, Trials, 10.1186/1745-6215-9-52, 9:1, Online publication date: 1-Dec-2008. Nifong L, Rodriguez E and Chitwood W Training in Telesurgery: Building a Successful Program Telesurgery, 10.1007/978-3-540-72999-0_13, (161-170) Zangrillo A, Crescenzi G, Landoni G, Leoni A, Marino G, Calabrò M, Corno C, Pappalardo F and Alfieri O (2005) Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting reduces postoperative neurologic complications, Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia, 10.1053/j.jvca.2005.01.030, 19:2, (193-196), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2005. Niinami H, Ogasawara H, Suda Y and Takeuchi Y (2005) Single-Vessel Revascularization With Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass, Chest, 10.1378/chest.127.1.47, 127:1, (47-52), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2005. Sutton S, Duncan M, Chase V, Hamman B and Cheung E (2016) Perfusion-assisted beating heart support with a miniature extracorporeal circuit and leukocyte filtration: a 58-year-old patient with severe COPD, Perfusion, 10.1191/0267659104pf772cr, 19:6, (369-373), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2004. Sajja L, Mannam G, Sompali S, Reddy K, Ravirala B, Raju B and Raju P (2004) Does multi-vessel off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting reduce post operative morbidity compared to on-pump CABG?, Indian Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 10.1007/s12055-004-0080-1, 20:4, (173-177), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2004. Lutter G and Cremer<\snm> <\au> J (2014) Percutaneous aortic valve replacement: more than palliation?, Expert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy, 10.1586/14779072.2.1.1, 2:1, (1-3), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2004. Martens S (2009) Clinical experience with the Heartflo™ System in coronary surgery, Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies, 10.1080/13645700310022709, 13:1, (22-25), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2004. Sunderdiek U, Kalweit G, Marx R, Schipke J and Gams E (2016) Minimally Invasive Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in High-Risk Patients. Late Follow-Up with Assessment of Left Internal Mammary Artery Graft Patency and Flow by Exercise Transthoracic Doppler Echocardiography, Cardiovascular Surgery, 10.1177/096721090301100510, 11:5, (389-395), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2003. Jenkins D, Al-Ruzzeh S, Khan S, Bustami M, Modine T, Yacoub M, Ilsley C and Amrani M (2003) Multivessel Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Can Be Taught to Trainee Surgeons, Journal of Cardiac Surgery, 10.1046/j.1540-8191.2003.02055.x, 18:5, (419-424), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2003. McConnell P, Schneeberger E and Michler R (2003) History and Development of Robotic Cardiac Surgery, Problems in General Surgery, 10.1097/01.sgs.0000081182.03671.6e, 20:2, (20-30), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2003. van Dijk D and Kalkman C (2003) Pro: OPCAB surgery is the ideal treatment for coronary artery disease, Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia, 10.1016/S1053-0770(03)00069-7, 17:3, (396-399), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2003. Puskas J, Williams W, Duke P, Staples J, Glas K, Marshall J, Leimbach M, Huber P, Garas S, Sammons B, McCall S, Petersen R, Bailey D, Chu H, Mahoney E, Weintraub W and Guyton R (2003) Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting provides complete revascularization with reduced myocardial injury, transfusion requirements, and length of stay: A prospective randomized comparison of two hundred unselected patients undergoing off-pump versus conventional coronary artery bypass grafting, The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 10.1067/mtc.2003.324, 125:4, (797-808), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2003. Chakravarthy M, Jawali V, Patil T, Jayaprakash K and Shivananda N (2003) High thoracic epidural anesthesia as the sole anesthetic for performing multiple grafts in off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery, Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia, 10.1053/jcan.2003.40, 17:2, (160-164), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2003. Gray D and Veenstra D (2003) Comparative economic analyses of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass surgery, The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 10.1067/mtc.2003.14, 125:3, (618-624), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2003. Martens S, Dietrich M, Doss M, Moritz A and Wimmer-Greinecker G (2002) The heartflo device for distal coronary anastomoses: clinical experiences in 60 patients, The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 10.1016/S0003-4975(02)03829-8, 74:4, (1139-1143), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2002. Bonchek L (2002) Off-pump coronary bypass: Is it for everyone?, The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 10.1067/mtc.2002.124240, 124:3, (431-434), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2002. Herreros González J and Rábago Juan-Aracil G (2002) Indicaciones de las nuevas técnicas quirúrgicas de revascularización miocárdica, Revista Clínica Española, 10.1016/S0014-2565(02)71012-6, 202:3, (154-156), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2002. Barnes R (2002) Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass and Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass Anesthesiology Review, 10.1016/B978-0-443-06601-6.50156-0, (371-373), . Chitwood W, Nifong L, Chapman W, Felger J, Bailey B, Ballint T, Mendleson K, Kim V, Young J and Albrecht R (2001) Robotic Surgical Training in an Academic Institution, Annals of Surgery, 10.1097/00000658-200110000-00007, 234:4, (475-486), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2001. Babineau H and Dietz P (2001) Coronary artery bypass, Current Surgery, 10.1016/S0149-7944(00)00411-6, 58:3, (253-259), Online publication date: 1-May-2001. Chitwood W and Nifong L (2001) Robotic Assistance in Cardiac Surgery, Problems in General Surgery, 10.1097/00013452-200103000-00003, 18:1, (9-20), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2001. van Dijk D, Nierich A, Eefting F, Buskens E, Nathoe H, Jansen E, Borst C, Knape J, Bredée J, de Medina E, Grobbee D, Diephuis J and de Jaegere P (2000) The Octopus Study, Controlled Clinical Trials, 10.1016/S0197-2456(00)00103-3, 21:6, (595-609), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2000. Goy J, Kaufmann U, Goy-Eggenberger D, Garachemani A, Hurni M, Carrel T, Gaspardone A, Burnand B, Meier B, Versaci F, Tomai F, Bertel O, Pieper M, Benedictis M and Eeckhout E (2000) A Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Stenting to Internal Mammary Artery Grafting for Proximal, Isolated De Novo Left Anterior Coronary Artery Stenosis: The SIMA Trial, Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 10.4065/75.11.1116, 75:11, (1116-1123), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2000. Holmes D and Bell M (2000) Left Anterior Descending Artery Stenosis: The Widow Maker Revisited, Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 10.4065/75.11.1113, 75:11, (1113-1115), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2000. Vassiliades T, Rogers E, Nielsen J and Lonquist J (2000) Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting: intermediate-term results, The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 10.1016/S0003-4975(00)01798-7, 70:3, (1063-1065), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2000. Chaney M, Morales M and Bakhos M (2000) Severe Incisional Pain and Long Thoracic Nerve Injury After Port-Access Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery, Anesthesia & Analgesia, 10.1213/00000539-200008000-00007, 91:2, (288-290), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2000. Chaney M, Morales M and Bakhos M (2000) Severe Incisional Pain and Long Thoracic Nerve Injury After Port-Access Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery, Anesthesia & Analgesia, 10.1097/00000539-200008000-00007, 91:2, (288-290), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2000. Lunnon M and Braddock M (2001) The impact of molecular medicine upon early cardiovascular drug development, British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 10.1046/j.1365-2125.2000.00211.x, 50:1, (1-8), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2000. Scheltes J, Heikens M, Pistecky P, van Andel C and Borst C (2000) Assessment of patented coronary end-to-side anastomotic devices using micromechanical bonding, The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 10.1016/S0003-4975(00)01380-1, 70:1, (218-221), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2000. Karagoz H, Sönmez B, Bakkaloglu B, Kurtoglu M, Erdinç M, Türkeli A and Bayazit K (2000) Coronary artery bypass grafting in the conscious patient without endotracheal general anesthesia, The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 10.1016/S0003-4975(00)01271-6, 70:1, (91-96), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2000. Wiklund L, Johansson M, Bugge M, Rådberg L, Brandup-Wognsen G and Berglin E (2000) Early outcome and graft patency in mammary artery grafting of left anterior descending artery with sternotomy or anterior minithoracotomy, The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 10.1016/S0003-4975(00)01197-8, 70:1, (79-83), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2000. Kshettry V, Flavin T, Emery R, Nicoloff D, Arom K and Petersen R (2000) Does multivessel, off-pump coronary artery bypass reduce postoperative morbidity?, The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 10.1016/S0003-4975(00)01419-3, 69:6, (1725-1730), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2000. Cremer J, Wittwer T, Böning A, Anssar M, Kofidis T, Mügge A and Haverich A (2000) Minimally invasive coronary artery revascularization on the beating heart, The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 10.1016/S0003-4975(00)01079-1, 69:6, (1787-1791), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2000. Wait M (2017) Treatment of Coronary Heart Disease with Minimally Invasive Surgery, Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings, 10.1080/08998280.2000.11927653, 13:2, (121-127), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2000. Sakakibara Y, Nakata H, Sasaki A, Enomoto Y, Osaka M and Mitsui T (2000) Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting in a patient with brainstem infarction, The Japanese Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 10.1007/BF03218127, 48:4, (229-232), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2000. Chitwood W and Nifong L (2000) Minimally Invasive Videloscopic Mitral Valve Surgery: The Current Role of Surgical Robotics, Journal of Cardiac Surgery, 10.1111/j.1540-8191.2000.tb00445.x, 15:1, (61-75), Online publication date: 1-Jan-2000. Mack M (1999) Is there a future for minimally invasive cardiac surgery?, European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 10.1093/ejcts/16.Supplement_2.S119, 16:Supplement_2, (S119-S125), Online publication date: 1-Nov-1999., Online publication date: 1-Nov-1999. Emery R, Arom K, Flavin T and Emery A (1999) A case for minimally invasive coronary surgery as primary treatment for left anterior descending coronary artery disease, European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 10.1093/ejcts/16.Supplement_2.S112, 16:Supplement_2, (S112-S116), Online publication date: 1-Nov-1999., Online publication date: 1-Nov-1999. EMERY R (1999) A case for minimally invasive coronary surgery as primary treatment for left anterior descending coronary artery disease*1, European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 10.1016/S1010-7940(99)00283-3, 16, (S112-S116), Online publication date: 1-Nov-1999. Cohn L (1999) What the cardiothoracic surgeon of the twenty-first century ought to be, The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 10.1016/S0022-5223(99)70001-2, 118:4, (581-587), Online publication date: 1-Oct-1999. Katz W, Zenati M, Mandarino W, Cohen H and Gorcsan J (1999) Assessment of left internal mammary artery graft patency and flow reserve after minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass, The American Journal of Cardiology, 10.1016/S0002-9149(99)00439-7, 84:7, (795-801), Online publication date: 1-Oct-1999. EMERY R (1999) Complete revascularization on cardiopulmonary bypass: a closer look at existing technology*1, European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 10.1016/S1010-7940(99)00191-8, 16, (S66-S68), Online publication date: 1-Sep-1999. Chaney M and Nikolov M (1999) Response, Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia, 10.1016/S1053-0770(99)90253-7, 13:4, (515), Online publication date: 1-Aug-1999. Blanc P, Aouifi A, Chiari P, Bouvier H, Jegaden O and Lehot J (1999) Chirurgie cardiaque mini-invasive: techniques chirurgicales et particularités anesthésiques, Annales Françaises d'Anesthésie et de Réanimation, 10.1016/S0750-7658(00)88454-3, 18:7, (748-771), Online publication date: 1-Aug-1999. Mack M, Magovern J, Acuff T, Landreneau R, Tennison D, Tinnerman E and Osborne J (1999) Results of graft patency by immediate angiography in minimally invasive coronary artery surgery, The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 10.1016/S0003-4975(99)00648-7, 68:2, (383-389), Online publication date: 1-Aug-1999. Ghotbi M and Ramsay J (2016) Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery: Impact on Resource Usage, Costs, Length of Stay, and Return to Function, Seminars in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia, 10.1177/108925329900300208, 3:2, (126-135), Online publication date: 1-Jul-1999. Chitwood W (1999) Video-Assisted and Robotic Mitral Valve Surgery: Toward an Endoscopic Surgery, Seminars in Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 10.1016/S1043-0679(99)70060-2, 11:3, (194-205), Online publication date: 1-Jul-1999. Bonchek L (2016) Some Thoughts on Minimally Invasive Coronary Bypass, Asian Cardiovascular and Thoracic Annals, 10.1177/021849239900700202, 7:2, (82-83), Online publication date: 1-Jun-1999. Wan S and Yim A (1999) Rationale Behind 'Off-Pump' Coronary Surgery: Why Patients Tolerate it Better? Yearbook of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine 1999, 10.1007/978-3-662-13453-5_51, (594-600), . August 11, 1998Vol 98, Issue 6 Advertisement Article Information Metrics Copyright © 1998 by American Heart Associationhttps://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.98.6.495 Originally publishedAugust 11, 1998 KeywordsEditorialsbypasssurgeryPDF download Advertisement
Referência(s)