Comparison of economic and patient outcomes with minimally invasive versus traditional off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting techniques

• Published in: Annals of surgery Vol. 248; no. 4; pp. 638 - 646
• Main Authors: Poston, Robert S, Tran, Richard, Collins, Michael, Reynolds, Marty, Connerney, Ingrid, Reicher, Barry, Zimrin, David, Griffith, Bartley P, Bartlett, Stephen T
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01-10-2008
• Subjects: Aged; Coronary Artery Bypass, Off-Pump - economics; Coronary Artery Bypass, Off-Pump - methods; Coronary Artery Disease - economics; Coronary Artery Disease - surgery; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Female; Hospital Costs; Humans; Length of Stay - economics; Male; Middle Aged; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - economics; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - methods; Prospective Studies; Quality of Life; Robotics - economics; Treatment Outcome; United States; United States
• ISSN: 0003-4932; 1528-1140
• DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31818a15b5

Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (miniCABG) decreases in-hospital morbidity versus traditional sternotomy CABG. We performed a prospective cohort study (NCT00481806) to assess the impact of miniCABG on costs and metrics that influence quality of life after hospital discharge.
One hundred consecutive miniCABG cases performed using internal mammary artery (IMA) grafting +/- coronary stenting were compared with a matched group of 100 sternotomy CABG patients using IMA and saphenous veins, both treating equivalent number of target coronaries (2.7 vs. 2.9), off-pump. We compared perioperative costs, time to return to work/normal activity, and risk of major adverse cardiac/cerebrovascular events (MACCE) at 1 year: myocardial infarction (elevated troponin or EKG changes), target vessel occlusion (CT angiography at 1 year), stroke, or death.
For miniCABG, robotic instruments and stents increased intraoperative costs; postoperative costs were decreased from significantly less intubation time (4.80 +/- 6.35 vs. 12.24 +/- 6.24 hours), hospital stay (3.77 +/- 1.51 vs. 6.38 +/- 2.23 days), and transfusion (0.16 +/- 0.37 vs. 1.37 +/- 1.35 U) leading to no significant differences in total costs. Undergoing miniCABG independently predicted earlier return to work after adjusting for confounders (t = -2.15; P = 0.04), whereas sternotomy CABG increased MACCE (HR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.4-7.6), largely from lower target-vessel patency.
MiniCABG shortens patient recovery time, minimizes MACCE risk at 1 year, and showed superior quality and outcome metrics versus standard-of-care CABG. These findings occurred without increasing costs and with superior target vessel graft patency.