Repeat Revascularization Post Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Comparing Minimally Invasive and Traditional Sternotomy Techniques in 1468 Cases.

BACKGROUND: Traditional open sternotomy coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) utilizes highly invasive techniques that lead to several serious complications. In response, minimally invasive cardiac surgery CABG (MICS-CABG) was developed. MICS-CABG is safe, reproducible, and with fewer complications, while allowing for better postoperative recovery periods. There is a paucity of data exploring rates of repeat revascularization in patients post MICS-CABG compared to post traditional sternotomy CABG. METHODS: This was a retrospective billing database review examining 1468 CABG patients at a large university medical center from January 2005 to December 2017. The primary objective was to compare the rate of repeat revascularization events between MICS-CABG and traditional open sternotomy CABG over an eight-year follow-up period. RESULTS: Our study population consisted of 1468 patients, of whom 513 had MICS-CABG and 955 had traditional CABG. The number of patients undergoing repeat revascularization within the eight-year surveillance was 99 for MICS-CABG and 75 for traditional CABG. The Kaplan-Meier survival probability estimates for eight years were 0.86 for MICS-CABG and 0.91 for traditional CABG. The mean time until a repeat revascularization event was 84.1 months for MICS-CABG and 88.5 months for traditional CABG. CONCLUSIONS: Traditional CABG was found to have a statistically significantly longer time to repeat revascularization than MICS-CABG. Despite the technical challenges associated with MICS-CABG, the time to repeat revascularization was different by only about four months, which may not hold large clinical significance. This suggests that MICS-CABG may have a role to play due to previous findings showing a reduction in complications while allowing for better postoperative recovery periods