Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33841980›Full record

ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2021

Minimally invasive and robotic coronary artery bypass grafting-a 25-year review.

Johannes Bonatti, Stephanie Wallner, Ingo Crailsheim, Martin Grabenwöger, Bernhard Winkler

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

45 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Life after Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Lifestyle Changes, Secondary Prevention, and Quality of Life.The International journal of angiology : official publication of the International College of Angiology, Inc · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Endo-Aortic Clamping with the IntraCludeJournal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Johannes BonattiDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Surgery, Vienna Health Network, Clinic Floridsdorf and Karl Landsteiner Institute of Cardiovascular Surgical Research, Vienna, Austria.
Stephanie WallnerDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Surgery, Vienna Health Network, Clinic Floridsdorf and Karl Landsteiner Institute of Cardiovascular Surgical Research, Vienna, Austria.
Ingo CrailsheimDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Surgery, Vienna Health Network, Clinic Floridsdorf and Karl Landsteiner Institute of Cardiovascular Surgical Research, Vienna, Austria.
Martin GrabenwögerDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Surgery, Vienna Health Network, Clinic Floridsdorf and Karl Landsteiner Institute of Cardiovascular Surgical Research, Vienna, Austria.
Bernhard WinklerDepartment of Cardiac and Vascular Surgery, Vienna Health Network, Clinic Floridsdorf and Karl Landsteiner Institute of Cardiovascular Surgical Research, Vienna, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the mid-1990s cardiac surgery started exploring minimally invasive methods for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and has over a 25-year period developed highly differentiated and less traumatic operations. Instead of the traditional sternotomy mini-incisions on the chest or ports are placed, surgery on the beating heart is applied, sophisticated remote access heart lung machine systems as well as videoscopic units are available, and robotic technology enables completely endoscopic approaches. This review describes these methods, reports on the cumulative intra- and postoperative outcome of these procedures, and gives an integrated view on what less invasive coronary bypass surgery can achieve. A total of 74 patient series published on the topic between 1996 and 2019 were reviewed. Six main versions of minimal access and robotically assisted CABG were applied in 11,135 patients. On average 1.3±0.6 grafts were placed and the operative time was 3 hours 42 min ± 1 hour 15 min. The procedures were carried out with a hospital mortality of 1.0% and a stroke rate of 0.6%. The revision rate for bleeding was 2.5% and a renal failure rate of 0.9% was noted. Wound infections occurred at a rate of 1.2% and postoperative hospital stay was 5.6±2.2 days. It can be concluded that less invasive and robotically assisted versions of coronary bypass grafting are carried out with an adequate safety level while surgical trauma is significantly reduced.

Indexed as

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)minimally invasiveremote access heart lung machinerobotic surgerytotally endoscopic coronary bypass

Identifiers

PMID33841980
PMCPMC8024818

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.