HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Author home page(s): Robert R. Lazzara Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lazzara, R. R. Articles by Kidwell, F. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lazzara, R. R. Articles by Kidwell, F. E.

Ann Thorac Surg 1999;67:500-503
© 1999 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

---

Original Articles

Minimally invasive direct coronary bypass versus cardiopulmonary technique: angiographic comparison¹

^a Division of Cardiac Services, St. Charles Medical Center, Bend, Oregon, USA

Accepted for publication July 25, 1998.

Address reprint requests to Dr Lazzara, The Hope Heart Institute, 528 18th Ave, Seattle, WA 98122

Background. Studies comparing minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting (MIDCABG) with techniques using cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) are needed.

Methods. Sixteen patients underwent single-vessel left internal thoracic artery–left anterior descending (LITA-LAD) MIDCABG through a left anterior thoracotomy, and 10 underwent multivessel bypass grafting that included a LITA-LAD, using CPB. Intraoperative completion angiography was performed on all LITA-LAD bypasses, and graded. One point each was given for: anastomotic patency, pedicle patency, intercostal obliteration, proper placement into the correct native coronary artery, and Thrombosis In Myocardial Ischemia grade III flow.

Results. There were no intraoperative deaths or morbidities. LITA takedown averaged 49 ± 18.6 minutes for MIDCABG and 16 ± 2.0 minutes for CPB CABG (p < 0.05). LITA length did not differ between groups (15.3 ± 1.2 cm for MIDCABG, 14.3 ± 1.08 cm for CPB CABG). Ischemic arrest time was significantly less for the CPB group (13.3 ± 8.3 minutes versus 24.5 ± 9.6 minutes; p < 0.05). Average grade for MIDCABG LITA-LAD was 4.06 ± 0.98 points versus 4.77 ± 0.98 points for CPB LITA-LAD bypass (p = not significant).

Conclusions. Intraoperative completion angiography is feasible and, when combined with a grading system, may facilitate the comparison of MIDCABG with standard techniques.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. T. Gray and D. L. Veenstra Comparative economic analyses of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass surgery J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., March 1, 2003; 125(3): 618 - 624. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. K. Hol, E. Fosse, R. Lundblad, S. Nitter-Hauge, P. Due-Tonnessen, K. Vatne, and H.-J. Smith The importance of intraoperative angiographic findings for predicting long-term patency in coronary artery bypass operations Ann. Thorac. Surg., March 1, 2002; 73(3): 813 - 818. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]