Eligibility for Minimally Invasive Coronary Artery Bypass Examination of Epicardial Adipose Tissue Using Computed Tomography

Objective: A variable that necessitates conversion to a conventional full-sternotomy coronary artery bypass procedure from a robotic-assisted endoscopic single-vessel small thoracotomy is the inability to visualize the left anterior descending coronary artery within the surrounding epicardial adipose tissue using the endoscopic camera. The purpose of this study was to determine whether anatomical properties of the epicardial adipose tissue examined using preoperative computed tomography (CT) images are able to predict and thus reduce the need for intraoperative conversion based on effective preoperative exclusion criteria. Methods: Retrospective analysis of patient preoperative CT angiography scans from both converted (n = 17) and successful robotic-assisted (n = 17) procedures was performed. Where possible, measurements of epicardial adipose tissue were acquired from axial slices, at the most accessible segment of the left anterior descending coronary artery. Results: Results indicate that patients who successfully underwent the endoscopic single-vessel small thoracotomy procedure (mean +/- SD depth, 4.9 +/- 1.9 mm) had significantly less epicardial adipose tissue (38%, P = 0.002) overlying the vessel toward the lateral chest wall than those who were converted to the full-sternotomy approach intraoperatively (mean +/- SD depth, 7.9 +/- 3.2 mm). Using this as a retrospective exclusion criterion reduces the conversion rate for this group by 47%, while maintaining a high specificity (94%). No significant differences exist between the two groups with respect to the remaining epicardial adipose tissue measurements or body mass index. Conclusions: The addition of CT angiography measurements of the epicardial adipose tissue overlying the left anterior descending coronary artery may enhance preoperative surgical planning for this procedure, thereby reducing the instances of procedural changes

Mid-term outcomes for Endoscopic versus Open Vein Harvest: a case control study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Saphenous vein remains the most common conduit for coronary artery bypass grafting with increasing uptake of minimally invasive harvesting techniques. While Endoscopic Vein Harvest (EVH) has been demonstrated to improve early morbidity compared to Open Vein Harvest (OVH), recent literature suggests that this may be at the expense of graft patency at one year and survival at three years.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We undertook a retrospective single-centre, single-surgeon, case-control study of EVH (n = 89) and OVH (n = 182). The primary endpoint was death with secondary endpoints including acute coronary syndrome, revascularisation or other major adverse cardiac events. Freedom from angina, wound complications and self-rated health status were also assessed. Where repeat angiography had been performed, this was reviewed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Both groups were well matched demographically and for peri-operative characteristics. All cause mortality was 2/89 (2%) and 11/182 (6%) in the EVH and OVH groups respectively. This was shown by Cox Log-Rank analysis to be non-significant (p = 0.65), even if adjusting for inpatient mortality (p = 0.74). There was no difference in the rates of freedom from angina (p = 1.00), re-admission (p = 0.78) or need for further anti-anginals (p = 1.00). There was a significant reduction in the incidence of leg wound infections and complications in the endoscopic group (EVH: 7%; OVH: 28%; p = 0.0008) and the skew of high patient self-rated health scores in the EVH group (61% compared to 52% in the open group) approached statistical significance (p = 0.06).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>While aware of the limitations of this small retrospective study, we are heartened by the preliminary results and consider our data to be justification for continuing to provide patients the opportunity to have minimally invasive conduit harvest in our centre. More robust evidence is still required to elucidate the implications of endoscopic techniques on conduit patency and patient outcome, but until the results of a large, prospective and randomised trial are available, we believe we can confidently offer our patients the option and benefits of EVH.</p