ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE@#To explore the feasibility, safety and mid-term outcome of minimally invasive cardiac surgery coronary artery bypass grafting (MICS CABG) surgery.@*METHODS@#Data of patients who underwent MICS CABG between November 2015 and November 2017 in Peking University Third Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Results were compared with the patients who underwent off-pump coronary aortic bypass grafting (OPCABG) surgery over the same period. The two groups were matched in propensity score matching method according to age, gender, left ventricular ejection fraction, body mass index, severity of coronary artery disease, smoking, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, renal insufficiency, history of cerebrovascular accident, and history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).@*RESULTS@#There were 85 patients in MICS CABG group, including 68 males (80.0%) and 17 females (20%), with an average age of (63.8±8.7) years; 451 patients were enrolled in OPCABG group, and 85 patients were matched by propensity score as control group (OPCABG group). There was no significant difference in general clinical characteristics (P>0.05). The average grafts of MICS CABG and OPCABG were 2.35±0.83 and 2.48±0.72 respectively (P=0.284). No conversion to thoracotomy in MICS CABG group or cardiopulmonary bypass in neither group occurred. There was no significant difference in the major adverse cardiovascular events (MACCEs, 1.17% vs. 3.52%), reoperation (2.34 vs. 3.52%), new-onset atrial fibrillation rate (4.70% vs. 3.52%) or new-onset renal insufficiency rate (1.17% vs. 0%) between MICS CABG group and OPCABG group (P>0.05). The operation time in MICS CABG group was longer than that in OPCABG group [(282.8±55.8) min vs. (246.8±56.9) min, P < 0.05], while the time of ventilator supporting(16.9 h vs. 29.6 h), hospitalization in ICU [(29.3±20.8) h vs. (51.5±48.3) h] and total hospitalization [(18.3±3.2) d vs. (25.7±4.2) d] in MICS CABG group were shorter than those in OPCABG group (P < 0.05). The total patency rate (A+B levels) of MICS CABG was 96.5% after surgery. There was no significant difference in MACCEs rate between the two groups [1.18%(1/85) vs. 3.61%(3/83), P>0.05] in 1-year follow up.@*CONCLUSION@#The MICS CABG surgery is a safe and feasible procedure with good clinical results in early and mid-term follow-up.