LI Jiahui , CUI Chenyi , LI Haoqi , XUAN Jizhong , LI Zhao , WANG Sheng , SUN Junjie , CHENG Zhaoyun
  • Department of Cardiac Surgery, Central China Fuwai Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, 450000, P. R. China;
CHENG Zhaoyun, Email: Chengzhy@zzu.edu.cn
Coronary heart disease; Da Vinci robot; minimally invasive surgery; off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting
10.7507/1007-4848.202412033
Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables References Cited by

Objective To explore the clinical efficacy of robot-assisted coronary artery bypass grafting through a small incision in the left intercostal space in the treatment of multivessel coronary disease. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting through a small incision in the left intercostal space at Central China Fuwai Hospital of Zhengzhou University from January 1, 2023 to October 15, 2024. Patients were divided into a robotic group and a minimally invasive group based on whether the surgery was assisted by the Da Vinci robot. Results A total of 81 patients were included, with 57 in the minimally invasive group, including 41 males and 16 females, with a median age of 65.0 (57.5, 69.5) years; and 24 in the robotic group, including 17 males and 7 females, with a median age of 61.0 (56.0, 69.0) years. There was no statistically significant difference in baseline data between the two groups (P>0.05). The robotic group had less intraoperative bleeding [300 (200, 438) mL vs. 500 (375, 600) mL, P=0.006], shorter postoperative mechanical ventilation time [15.0 (13.3, 23.5) h vs. 22.0 (15.5, 39.5) h, P=0.037], and lower incidence of postoperative pain [8 (33.3%) vs. 33 (57.9%), P=0.043]. The hospitalization cost in the robotic group was higher than that in the minimally invasive group [130491 (123298, 135691) yuan vs. 123892 (115543, 133449) yuan, P=0.023]. There was no statistical difference in postoperative laboratory indicators between the two groups (P>0.05). There was also no statistical difference in the duration of surgery, postoperative 24 h drainage volume, ICU stay time, postoperative hospital stay or incidences of perioperative compications including pleural effusion, transfusion, new-onset atrial fibrillation, acute kidney injury, non-union of incision, major cardiovascular and cerebrovascular adverse events, and reoperation between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusion Compared with the minimally invasive group, the robotic group shows satisfactory efficacy and can effectively reduce postoperative pain and intraoperative bleeding, and shorten postoperative mechanical ventilation time.

Copyright © the editorial department of Chinese Journal of Clinical Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery of West China Medical Publisher. All rights reserved