Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39434975›Full record

ReviewAnnals of cardiothoracic surgery2024

How to advance from minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting to totally endoscopic coronary bypass grafting: challenges in Europe versus United States of America.

Michiel Algoet, Tom Melvin, Stepan Cerny, Johannes Bonatti, Sandeep Singh, Thierry Folliguet, Paul Modi, Ulrich Franke, Monica Gianoli, Alfonso Agnino and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of cardiothoracic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Anesthesia for Minimally Invasive Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Michiel AlgoetDepartment of Cardiovascular Sciences, Research Unit of Cardiac Surgery, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Tom MelvinSchool of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Stepan CernyCardiothoracic Surgery Department, Na Homolce Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic.
Johannes BonattiDivision of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Sandeep SinghISALA Hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands.
Thierry FolliguetDepartment of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Henri-Mondor, Assistance Publique-Hopitaux de Paris Créteil, Paris, France.
Paul ModiThe Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.
Ulrich FrankeDepartment of Cardiovascular Surgery, Robert Bosch Hospital, Stuttgart, Germany.
Monica GianoliDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Alfonso AgninoDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Humanitas Gavazzeni, Bergamo, Italy.
Filip CasselmanCardiovascular Center Aalst, OLV Clinic Aalst, Aalst, Belgium.
Wouter OosterlinckDepartment of Cardiovascular Sciences, Research Unit of Cardiac Surgery, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Robotic coronary and intra-cardiac surgery has been available for more than 25 years. In this period, multiple studies have demonstrated the beneficial effects of robotic surgery over conventional open surgery. Throughout the years, technical developments have enabled us to perform totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass (TECAB) grafting. But these techniques remained in the hands of a small group of pioneers because of a lack of structured training programs and the absence of long-term results at that time. Currently, a renewed interest and a wide dispersion of robotic platforms, thanks to use of robotics in other disciplines, has led to an exponential increase in robotic cardiac centers both in Europe and USA. Nonetheless, this increase was slowed down in Europe as a result of the uncertainty introduced by the implementation of a revised regulatory framework for medical devices [Regulation 2017/745, 'Medical Device Regulation' ('MDR')]. The MDR was introduced with the goal of increasing patient safety and supporting innovation. Implementing the MDR has proven to be exceptionally challenging and risks to the supply of essential devices have been identified. Changes to both regulatory and market dynamics led to a circumstance where the only available robotic platform for cardiac surgery decided to cease marketing of essential accessories for conducting surgery. This resulted in the disappearance of dedicated tools such as the Endowrist stabilizer, essential for TECAB, and the atrial retractor which is essential for intra-cardiac surgery. In the mean-time, further clinical evidence was published demonstrating the superiority of robotic cardiac surgery over other minimally invasive approaches. This has demonstrated the need to better define the clinical evidence requirements for regulatory purposes to ensure that dedicated tools for evidence-based interventions in robotic coronary surgery remain available such that TECAB can continue in Europe.

Indexed as

minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB)robotic cardiac surgeryTotally endoscopic coronary artery bypass (TECAB)

Identifiers

PMID39434975
PMCPMC11491180

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.