HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Park, J.-W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Park, J.-W.

Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1999;16:S117-S118
© 1999 Elsevier Science NL

Interventional cardiology versus minimally invasive cardiac surgery

Cardiovascular Institute, University Dresden, Fetscherstrasse 76, D-01307 Dresden, Germany

^* Tel.: +49-351-450-1200; fax: +49-351-450-1202

Comparing interventional cardiology with minimally invasive cardiac surgery 1998 goes back to the early 80s when cardiologists treated coronary artery disease patients with balloon angioplasty under a permanent observation of cardiac surgeons who could offer to the patient the well established Conventional CABG, which already had proven to be safe, effective, durable, reproducible, and complete. At that time some critics predicted PTCA would remain the hobby of some cardiologists. During the last two decades, however, an explosive proliferation in the number of PTCA procedures has occurred, which soon exceed the number of CABG procedures. As technology has advanced and operator experience has increased, the application of PTCA has expanded from dilatation of simple, concentric single-vessel stenotic lesions to progressively more complex lesions in multivessel disease. Within the last 5 years the minimally invasive cardiac surgery has progressed, which allows the performance of even complex cardiac surgery through small incisions with (port-access technique) or without (MIDCAB technique) cardiopulmonary bypass. The rationale of enthusiastic users of these new techniques leads to improved cosmetic results, less surgical trauma, decreased length of hospital stay, reduced cost, and comparable long-term results with respect to conventional CABG. Similar to the prediction about PTCA two decades ago, some critics say that minimally invasive cardiac surgery would remain the hobby of some cardiac surgeons.

Key Words: Interventional cardiology • Minimally invasive cardiac surgery

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C.V Patil, E Nikolsky, M Boulos, E Grenadier, and R Beyar Multivessel coronary artery disease: current revascularization strategies Eur. Heart J., July 2, 2001; 22(14): 1183 - 1197. [PDF]