Comparison of Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass and Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass in Single-Vessel Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Off-pump coronary surgery is an established method of less invasive cardiac surgery. We compared our early results in patents with I-vessel disease who underwent surgery with full sternotomy with off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) or a left anterior minithoracotomy with minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting (MIDCAB) without cardiopulmonary bypass. METHODS: From July 2003 to June 2006, 54 patients with single-vessel disease of the left anterior descending artery who underwent surgery performed by the same surgical team were included in this prospective study. Of these patients, 27 underwent MIDCAB through an anterolateral minithoracotomy, and 27 had OPCAB through a full sternotomy. Patients were selected for the surgical groups on the basis of general condition, anatomical aspects, type of coronary lesions, comorbidities, and patient preferences. Demographic, operative, and postoperative data were collected prospectively. RESULTS: Demographic data, Canadian Cardiovascular Society Classification, and comorbidities were identical for both groups. There were no cases of operative mortality, early graft insufficiency, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, or conversion to cardiopulmonary bypass in either group. Durations of mechanical ventilation and total hospital stay were shorter in the MIDCAB group, 6.8+/-3.0 hours vs 8.3+/-1.6 hours and 4.5+/-0.7 days vs 5.2+/-1.4 days (P= .03 and P= .03), respectively. Atrial fibrillation was seen in 2 patients in each group; all were returned to sinus rhythm by medical therapy. CONCLUSION: Although MIDCAB grafting is a challenging technique, it may be safely performed on selected patients with low postoperative mortality and morbidity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".