Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting: changes in anesthetic management and surgical procedure

Anesthetic challenges in minimally invasive cardiac surgery: Are we moving in a right direction?

Continuously growing patient's demand, technological innovation, and surgical expertise have led to the widespread popularity of minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS). Patient's demand is being driven by less surgical trauma, reduced scarring, lesser pain, substantially lesser duration of hospital stay, and early return to normal activity. In addition, MICS decreases the incidence of postoperative respiratory dysfunction, chronic pain, chest instability, deep sternal wound infection, bleeding, and atrial fibrillation. Widespread media coverage, competition among surgeons and hospitals, and their associated brand values have further contributed in raising awareness among patients. In this process, surgeons and anesthesiologist have moved from the comfort of traditional wide incision surgeries to more challenging and intensively skilled MICS. A wide variety of cardiac lesions, techniques, and approaches coupled with a significant learning curve have made the anesthesiologist's job a challenging one. Anesthesiologists facilitate in providing optimal surgical settings beginning with lung isolation, confirmation of diagnosis, cannula placement, and cardioplegia delivery. However, the concern remains and it mainly relates to patient safety, prolonged intraoperative duration, and reduced surgical exposure leading to suboptimal treatment. The risk of neurological complications, aortic injury, phrenic nerve palsy, and peripheral vascular thromboembolism can be reduced by proper preoperative evaluation and patient selection. Nevertheless, advancement in surgical instruments, perfusion practices, increasing use of transesophageal echocardiography, and accumulating experience of surgeons and anesthesiologist have somewhat helped in amelioration of these valid concerns. A patient-centric approach and clear communication between the surgeon, anesthesiologist, and perfusionist are vital for the success of MICS.

The effects of intrathecal morphine on patients undergoing minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass surgery

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of intrathecal morphine (ITM) on the perioperative use of opiates and the fast-track pathway in patients undergoing minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting (MIDCAB).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

University teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-two elective consecutive patients who underwent MIDCAB surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

Eleven patients received an intrathecal injection of morphine, 7 microg/kg (ITM group, n=11), and the control group (n=11) received standard anesthesia care.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The intraoperative dose of fentanyl was 0.55+/-0.2 mg in the ITM group and 1.1+/-0.2 mg in the control group (p<0.0001). Four patients in the ITM group and none in the control group were extubated in the operating room. Extubation time was 3.2+/-4.7 hours in the ITM group and 6.3+/-3.4 hours in the control group (p=0.016). Morphine requirements in 24 hours after surgery were 2.0+/-3.5 mg in the ITM and 16.1+/-4.8 mg in the control group (p<0.0001). There were no differences in ischemic time, intraoperative fluid requirements, postoperative blood loss, and duration of surgical procedure. Hospital length of stay was shorter in the ITM group compared with the control group (3.9+/-1.7 days v 4.9+/-1.4 days, respectively, p=0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

ITM has to be considered in MIDCAB surgery as an effective component of the perioperative analgesia. The safety and effects of ITM in the patients recovery after MIDCAB surgery should be evaluated in further prospective studies.

Off-pump coronary surgery: how do the anesthetic considerations differ?

In recent years, there has been much interest in performing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery without the aid of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Initial efforts focused on "minimally invasive" direct coronary artery bypass, wherein the left anterior descending artery is bypassed with an in situ left internal mammary artery graft through a small left anterior thoracotomy. A more widely adopted approach however, is off-pump CABG (OPCAB), in which CABG surgery is performed on one or more vessels through the usual median sternotomy approach without the aid of CPB. This article reviews the differences in the anesthetic considerations of OPCAB compared to conventional CABG using CPB.

Myocardial Protection During Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery

Minimally invasive cardiac surgery or beating heart surgery requires very precise observation, explanation, diagnosis, and proper treatment of all changes in the cardiovascular system that occur during the procedure. A major concern in beating heart surgery is the risk of inducing myocardial ischemia without the circulatory support of cardiopulmonary bypass. Protection of myocardium in different stages of the perioperative period is crucial. The following issues should be taken into consideration: preoperative preparation of the myocardium, providing anesthesia techniques that may help to protect the myocardium, and the use of surgical techniques for myocardial protection. Hemodynamic alterations during dislocations of the heart require understanding of these changes and the effects they have on the myocardium. Proper monitoring during the whole procedure, correlation of all findings with the treatment and therapeutic maneuvers, and excellent cooperation between anesthesiologist and surgeon are essential for myocardial protection. New pharmacologic methods, some experimental, should be considered in near future for myocardial protection during beating heart surgery.

Off-pump coronary artery surgery

Cardiopulmonary bypass has several associated deleterious effects that include a systemic inflammatory response, coagulopathy, central nervous system complications and a variable degree of end-organ damage. The recent upsurge in interest in "beating-heart" surgery attempts to avoid these deleterious effects. Advances in surgical technique, such as the use of intracoronary shunts and the Octopus retractor, have made beating-heart surgery a reality. The challenges for the anaesthetist are greater than for coronary artery surgery using cardiopulmonary bypass, and whilst some advantages are proven, such as the lack of the inflammatory response and the decreased need for blood or blood products, others have yet to be proved and there is a need for further research. The advantages and disadvantages need to be evaluated in randomised studies in order to confirm the safety and efficacy of these new techniques in terms of long-term graft patency and decreased morbidity.

To ventilate or not after minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass surgery: the role of epidural anesthesia

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of immediate postoperative extubation and postoperative ventilation after minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) surgery and to assess the role of epidural anesthesia.

DESIGN

Randomized prospective study.

SETTING

University hospital, single institution.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients (n = 90) scheduled for elective MIDCAB surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were divided into 3 groups: 30 patients had general anesthesia and were extubated immediately after surgery (extubated group), 30 patients had a thoracic epidural and general anesthesia and were extubated immediately after surgery (epidural group), and 30 patients had general anesthesia and were ventilated after surgery (intubated group).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

With a similar cardiac index and less vasoactive medication, mean arterial blood pressure (77 plus minus 8 mmHg [mean plus minus SD]) and heart rate (76 plus minus 10 beats/min) in the epidural group were lower on the first postoperative day than in the intubated group (83 plus minus 10 mmHg and 81 plus minus 13 beats/min) and the extubated group (86 plus minus 10 mmHg and 83 plus minus 13) (p = 0.01 and p = 0.09). Oxygenation on the first postoperative day was better in the epidural group than in the intubated group (14.8 plus minus 3.8 kPa v 12.6 plus minus 3.2 kPa; p = 0.05). The epidural group and the extubated group had a transient respiratory acidosis postoperatively. Pain score in the epidural group was lower on the first postoperative day than in the extubated group with general anesthesia (3.0 plus minus 1.6 visual analog scale v 4.6 plus minus 1.8 visual analog scale; p = 0.01). Hospital stay was shorter in the epidural group than in the ventilated group (5.9 plus minus 2.4 days v 8.1 plus minus 5.3 days; p = 0.05)

CONCLUSION

Immediate postoperative extubation in patients with thoracic epidural anesthesia and supplemental general anesthesia provides the most favorable clinical circumstances after MIDCAB surgery.