Page 59 - Read Online
P. 59

Ashenhurst et al. Vessel Plus 2024;8:3  https://dx.doi.org/10.20517/2574-1209.2023.90  Page 13 of 15

               CONCLUSION
               In the literature, MICS CABG has been consistently shown to be a durable, safe, and feasible alternative to
               sternotomy CABG. With favorable early outcomes, comparable long-term outcomes and graft patency, and
               the feasibility of its implementation, MICS CABG is an exciting development in the field of cardiac surgery.
               It is a safe, learnable, effective, full-revascularization non-sternotomy CABG operation that requires
               proficiency with OPCAB and MIDCAB prior to being undertaken. Multicenter, prospective randomized
               control trials are underway and will help establish MICS CABG as a standard treatment for patients afflicted
               with CAD.


               DECLARATIONS
               Authors’ contributions
               Made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the study: Ashenhurst C, Toubar O, Ruel M
               Guidance and recommendations on this review: Guo M, Issa H, Ponnambalam M
               Contributed significantly to the content and meet the ICMJE criteria: All authors
               Read and approved the final submission: All authors

               Availability of data and materials
               Not applicable.

               Financial support and sponsorship
               None.

               Conflicts of interest
               Dr. Ruel M is a MICS CABG proctor and PI for the MIST trial (both with support from Medtronic, Inc.).
               All other authors declared that there are no conflicts of interest.


               Ethical approval and consent to participate
               There is no original human research data in this paper. Prior review of surgical and medical records was
               performed under Research Ethics Approval from the University of Ottawa Heart Institute.

               Consent for publication
               All patients gave explicit consent for their photo to be included in this review.

               Copyright
               © The Author(s) 2024.

               REFERENCES
               1.       Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/cardiovascular-diseases-(cvds)
                   [Last accessed on 10 Jan 2024].
               2.      Carrel A VIII. On the experimental surgery of the thoracic aorta and heart. Ann Surg 1910;52:83-95.  DOI  PubMed  PMC
               3.      Kolesov VI, Potashov LV. [Surgery of coronary arteries]. Eksp Khir Anesteziol 1965;10:3-8.  PubMed
               4.       Writing  Committee  Members;  Lawton  JS,  Tamis-Holland  JE,  et  al.  2021  ACC/AHA/SCAI  guideline  for  coronary
                   artery revascularization:  a  report  of the  american  college  of  cardiology/American  heart  association  joint  committee  on  clinical
                   practice guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2022;79:e21-129.  DOI
               5.       Head SJ, Milojevic M, Taggart DP, Puskas JD. Current practice of state-of-the-art surgical coronary revascularization. Circulation
                   2017;136:1331-45.  DOI  PubMed
               6.       Bachar BJ, Manna B. Coronary artery bypass graft. 2023. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK507836/ [Last
                   accessed on 10 Jan 2024].
               7.       Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) rate. Available from: https://www.cihi.ca/en/indicators/coronary-artery-bypass-graft-cabg-rate
                   [Last accessed on 10 Jan 2024].
               8.       van Gulik L, Janssen LI, Ahlers SJ, et al. Risk factors for chronic thoracic pain after cardiac surgery via sternotomy. Eur J
                   Cardiothorac Surg 2011;40:1309-13.  DOI
   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64