ArticleJournal of cardiovascular development and disease2026
Extending the Indications for Full Revascularization with Robotic-Assisted Coronary Artery Bypass.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular development and disease, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Coronary artery bypass grafting via median sternotomy carries considerable morbidity, and minimally invasive robotic approaches have been increasingly performed for surgical revascularization of coronary arteries. We report our institutional experience in robotic-assisted minimally invasive coronary revascularization in a broad patient population with complex multivessel disease. We retrospectively reviewed robotic-assisted minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (RA-MIDCAB) procedures performed at our center between January 2022 and June 2026. Patient demographics, additional procedures and in-hospital outcomes were recorded. A total of 242 patients were included (mean age 63.4 ± 9.7 years; 31 (12.8%) female). Single-vessel bypass was performed in 25 (10.3%) patients; 212 (87.6%) patients underwent an operation on the arrested heart (mean cross-clamp time 66.9 ± 21.7 min) and 15 (6.2%) received an off-pump operation (mean CPB time in on-pump patients 155.7 ± 46.0 min). Full arterial revascularization was achieved in 42 (17.4%) patients; a bilateral internal mammary artery configuration was used in 9 (3.7%) patients. Coronary endarterectomy was performed in 16 (6.6%) patients and concomitant left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion was performed in three (1.2%) patients. Epiaortic ultrasonography-guided clamp placement was performed in 27 (11.2%) patients with ascending-aortic plaque. In-hospital mortality occurred in two (0.8%) patients; no patient sustained a major neurological deficit, and the transfusion rate was 9.9%. Mean ventilation time was 4.0 (3.0-6.0) hours and mean intensive care unit stay was 22.6 ± 11.2 h. With careful planning and accumulated experience, the indications for robotic-assisted minimally invasive revascularization can be extended to include patients who require full-arterial revascularization, have ascending aortic plaques, complex coronary disease requiring endarterectomy, or atrial fibrillation where concomitant left atrial appendage occlusion is indicated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.