Pulse Brain · Growing Health Evidence Index
Peer-reviewed

Robot-assisted vs. conventional MIDCAB: A propensity-matched analysis

Ján Gofus, Stepan Cerny, Youssef Shahin, Zdeněk Šorm, Martin Voborník, Petr Smolák, Ananya Sethi, Samuel Marcinov, Mikita Karalko, James Lago Chek, Jan Harrer, Jan Vojáček, Marek Pojar

Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine · 2022

Read source ↗ All evidence

Summary

Background: Robotic assistance (RA) in the harvesting of internal thoracic artery during minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting (MIDCAB) provides several potential benefits for surgeon and patient in comparison with conventional MIDCAB. The two technical options have not been thoroughly compared in the literature yet. We aimed to perform this in our cohort with the use of propensity-score matching (PSM). Methods: This was a retrospective comparison of all consecutive patients undergoing conventional MIDCAB (2005-2021) and RA-MIDCAB (2018-2021) at our institution with the use of PSM with 27 preoperative covariates. Results: < 0.001). There was no difference in the risk of perioperative complications, short-term and mid-term mortality between the groups. Conclusions: RA-MI

Source type
Peer-reviewed study
DOI
10.3389/fcvm.2022.943076
Catalogue ID
SNmojbimf5-6gdkgw
Pulse AI · ask about this record

Dig deeper with Pulse AI.

Pulse AI has read the whole catalogue. Ask about this record, its theme, or how the findings apply to UK farming and policy — every answer cites the underlying studies.