Port-Access Coronary Artery Bypass

  • Greg H. Ribakove
  • Aubrey C. Galloway
  • Eugene A. Grossi
  • Stephen B. Colvin
Chapter
Part of the Contemporary Cardiology book series (CONCARD)

Abstract

Fueled by the success of laparoscopie and thoracoscopic techniques, recent developments in minimally invasive surgery are now being applied to cardiac surgery. The obvious advantages to the patient include a smaller incision, less pain, an improved cosmetic result, and a potentially shorter recovery time. However, owing to the high degree of accuracy and precision required for cardiac surgery and the need for cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and myocardial protection for most cardiac surgical procedures, methods of minimally invasive cardiac surgery were slow to develop. Newly proposed techniques for minimally invasive cardiac surgery had to meet the dual challenges of being less invasive while achieving outcomes equivalent to those of established techniques without compromising safety or efficacy. These goals could not be accomplished on a widespread basis with beating heart techniques, nor could these goals be achieved until less invasive methods of extracorporeal perfusion and cardioplegic arrest were developed.

Keywords

Radial Artery Myocardial Protection Proximal Anastomosis Cardioplegic Arrest Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Calafiore AM, DiGiammarco G, Teodori G, et al. Left anterior descending coronary artery grafting via left anterior small thoracotomy without cardiopulmonary bypass. Ann Thorac Surg 1996; 61: 1658–1665.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Subramanian VA, Sani G, Benetti FJ, et al. Minimally invasive coronary bypass surgery: a multi-center report of preliminary clinical experience. Circulation 1995;(Suppl)92:I-645.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Subramanian VA. Clinical experience with minimally invasive reoperative coronary bypass surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, in press.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Landreneau RJ, Mack MJ, Magovern JA, et al. “Keyhole” coronary artery bypass surgery. Ann Surg 1996; 224: 453–462.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stevens JH, Burdon TA, Peters WS, et al. Port-access coronary artery bypass grafting: a proposed surgical method. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1996; 111: 567–573.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schwartz DS, Ribakove GH, Grossi EA, et al. Minimally invasive cardiopulmonary bypass with cardioplegic arrest: a closed chest technique with equivalent myocardial protection. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1996; 111: 556–566.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stevens JH, Burdon TA, Siegel LC, et al. Port-access coronary artery bypass with cardioplegic arrest: acute and chronic canine studies. Ann Thorac Surg 1996; 62: 435–441.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schwartz DS, Ribakove GH, Grossi EA, et al. Multi-vessel port-access coronary artery bypass grafting with cardioplegic arrest: technique and reproducibility. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1997; 114: 46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Reyes AT, Frame R, Brodman RF. Technique for harvesting the radial artery as a coronary artery bypass graft. Ann Thorac Surg 1995; 59: 118–126.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Greg H. Ribakove
  • Aubrey C. Galloway
  • Eugene A. Grossi
  • Stephen B. Colvin

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations