Academic Journal
View in EDS

Evolution of coronary artery bypass grafting: conventional, minimally invasive, robotic, and hybrid revascularisation techniques.

Bibliographic Details
Title: Evolution of coronary artery bypass grafting: conventional, minimally invasive, robotic, and hybrid revascularisation techniques.
Authors: Muafa HM; Department of Surgery, 21 September University for Medical and Applied Sciences, Sana'a, Yemen. h.m.muafa@gmail.com.
Source: Journal of robotic surgery [J Robot Surg] 2026 Jul 27; Vol. 20 (1). Date of Electronic Publication: 2026 Jul 27.
Publication Type: Journal Article; Review
Language: English
Journal Info: Publisher: Springer Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 101300401 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1863-2491 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 18632483 NLM ISO Abbreviation: J Robot Surg Subsets: MEDLINE
Imprint Name(s): Original Publication: London : Springer
MeSH Terms: Robotic Surgical Procedures*/methods , Robotic Surgical Procedures*/trends , Coronary Artery Bypass*/methods , Coronary Artery Bypass*/trends , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures*/methods , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures*/trends , Coronary Artery Disease*/surgery, Humans
Abstract: Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains one of the most durable treatments for obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), particularly in anatomically complex multivessel disease, diabetes, left main disease and ischaemic cardiomyopathy. During the last three decades, the conventional operation performed through median sternotomy with cardiopulmonary bypass has been complemented by off-pump, minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB), multivessel minimally invasive coronary surgery, robotic-assisted CABG, totally endoscopic CABG (TECAB) and hybrid coronary revascularisation (HCR). This narrative review summarises the evolution of CABG, compares conventional and minimally invasive approaches, and discusses current evidence, indications, limitations, implementation challenges, future directions and a practical decision algorithm for patient selection. A narrative literature review was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, major cardiology and cardiothoracic guideline documents, and recent open-access reviews and meta-analyses published up to June 2026. Priority was given to contemporary guidelines, landmark trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and large observational series. Because this is a narrative review, no formal pooled analysis or risk-of-bias grading was performed. Conventional CABG provides reliable complete revascularisation and remains the preferred strategy for many patients with complex multivessel CAD. The survival value of the left internal mammary artery to left anterior descending artery graft underpins both conventional and minimally invasive strategies. MIDCAB is most established for isolated LAD disease and as the surgical component of HCR. Robotic-assisted CABG and TECAB reduce access trauma and may improve recovery, transfusion requirements and wound morbidity, but they require dedicated training, a specialised team and a high-volume programme to overcome the learning curve. HCR offers a biologically attractive compromise by combining durable LIMA-LAD bypass with PCI to non-LAD vessels, yet randomised evidence remains limited. The proposed algorithm translates these data into a clinically practical Heart Team pathway rather than a purely technique-centred comparison. The future of CABG is not a replacement of conventional surgery by a single minimally invasive method, but a personalised revascularisation strategy selected by a Heart Team. The most clinically relevant question is not whether one technique is universally superior, but which patient, coronary anatomy and institutional environment are best suited to conventional CABG, MIDCAB, robotic/TECAB or HCR.
(© 2026. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)
Competing Interests: Declarations. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Not applicable. This is a narrative review of previously published literature. Consent for publication: Not applicable.
References: Favaloro RG (1968) Saphenous vein autograft replacement of severe segmental coronary artery occlusion: operative technique. Ann Thorac Surg 5(4):334–339. (PMID: 10.1016/S0003-4975(10)66351-55647919)
Loop FD, Lytle BW, Cosgrove DM, Stewart RW, Goormastic M, Williams GW et al (1986) Influence of the internal-mammary-artery graft on 10-year survival and other cardiac events. N Engl J Med 314(1):1–6. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM198601023140101. (PMID: 10.1056/NEJM1986010231401013484393)
Cameron A, Davis KB, Green G, Schaff HV (1996) Coronary bypass surgery with internal-thoracic-artery grafts: effects on survival over a 15-year period. N Engl J Med 334(4):216–219. (PMID: 10.1056/NEJM1996012533404028531997)
Yusuf S, Zucker D, Peduzzi P, Fisher LD, Takaro T, Kennedy JW et al (1994) Effect of coronary artery bypass graft surgery on survival: overview of 10-year results from randomized trials by the Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Trialists Collaboration. Lancet 344(8922):563–570. (PMID: 10.1016/S0140-6736(94)91963-17914958)
Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, Alfonso F, Banning AP, Benedetto U et al (2019) 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J 40(2):87–165. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy394. (PMID: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy39430165437)
Lawton JS, Tamis-Holland JE, Bangalore S, Bates ER, Beckie TM, Bischoff JM et al (2022) 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization. Circulation 145(3):e18–e114. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000001038. (PMID: 10.1161/CIR.000000000000103834882435)
Vrints C, Andreotti F, Koskinas KC, Rossello X, Adamo M, Ainslie J et al (2024) 2024 ESC Guidelines for the management of chronic coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J 45(36):3415–3537. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae177. (PMID: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehae17739210710)
Byrne RA, Rossello X, Coughlan JJ, Barbato E, Berry C, Chieffo A et al (2023) 2023 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J 44(38):3720–3826. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehad191. (PMID: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehad19137622654)
Farkouh ME, Domanski M, Sleeper LA, Siami FS, Dangas G, Mack M et al (2012) Strategies for multivessel revascularization in patients with diabetes. N Engl J Med 367(25):2375–2384. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1211585. (PMID: 10.1056/NEJMoa121158523121323)
Thuijs DJFM, Kappetein AP, Serruys PW, Mohr FW, Morice MC, Mack MJ et al (2019) Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease: 10-year follow-up of the SYNTAX trial. Lancet 394(10206):1325–1334. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31997-X. (PMID: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31997-X31488373)
Velazquez EJ, Lee KL, Jones RH, Al-Khalidi HR, Hill JA, Panza JA et al (2016) Coronary-artery bypass surgery in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. N Engl J Med 374(16):1511–1520. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1602001. (PMID: 10.1056/NEJMoa1602001270407234938005)
Gaudino M, Benedetto U, Fremes S, Biondi-Zoccai G, Sedrakyan A, Puskas JD et al (2018) Radial-artery or saphenous-vein grafts in coronary-artery bypass surgery. N Engl J Med 378(22):2069–2077. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1716026. (PMID: 10.1056/NEJMoa171602629708851)
Taggart DP, Benedetto U, Gerry S, Altman DG, Gray AM, Lees B et al (2019) Bilateral versus single internal-thoracic-artery grafts at 10 years. N Engl J Med 380(5):437–446. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1808783. (PMID: 10.1056/NEJMoa180878330699314)
Gaudino M, Angelini GD, Antoniades C, Bakaeen F, Benedetto U, Calafiore AM et al (2018) Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: 30 years of debate. J Am Heart Assoc 7(16):e009934. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.118.009934. (PMID: 10.1161/JAHA.118.009934303693286201399)
Lamy A, Devereaux PJ, Prabhakaran D, Taggart DP, Hu S, Straka Z et al (2016) Five-year outcomes after off-pump or on-pump coronary-artery bypass grafting. N Engl J Med 375(24):2359–2368. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1601564. (PMID: 10.1056/NEJMoa160156427771985)
Calafiore AM, Di Giammarco G, Teodori G, Bosco G, D’Annunzio E, Barsotti A et al (1996) Left anterior descending coronary artery grafting via left anterior small thoracotomy without cardiopulmonary bypass. Ann Thorac Surg 61(6):1658–1663. (PMID: 10.1016/0003-4975(96)00187-78651765)
Subramanian VA, McCabe JC, Geller CM (1997) Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting: two-year clinical experience. Ann Thorac Surg 64(6):1648–1655. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-4975(97)01099-0. (PMID: 10.1016/S0003-4975(97)01099-09436550)
McGinn JT Jr, Usman S, Lapierre H, Pothula VR, Mesana TG, Ruel M (2009) Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting: dual-center experience in 450 consecutive patients. Circulation 120(11 Suppl):S78–S84. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.840041. (PMID: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.84004119752390)
Marin-Cuartas M, Sá MPBO, Torregrossa G, Davierwala PM (2021) Minimally invasive coronary artery surgery: robotic and nonrobotic minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass techniques. JTCVS Tech 10:170–177. (PMID: 10.1016/j.xjtc.2021.10.008349843778691906)
Bonatti J, Wallner S, Winkler B, Grabenwöger M (2020) Robotic totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting: current status and future prospects. Expert Rev Med Devices 17(1):33–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/17434440.2020.1704252. (PMID: 10.1080/17434440.2020.170425231829047)
Bonatti J, Vetrovec G, Riga C, Wazni O, Stadler P (2021) Minimally invasive and robotic coronary artery bypass grafting: a 25-year review. Ann Cardiothorac Surg 10(6):701–716.
Weymann A, Amanov L, Beltsios E, Arjomandi Rad A, Szczechowicz M, Merzah AS et al (2024) Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting: sixteen years of single-center experience. J Clin Med 13(11):3338. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13113338. (PMID: 10.3390/jcm131133383889304811173276)
Hwang B, Ramponi F, Yan TD et al (2024) Systematic review and meta-analysis of two decades of reported outcomes for robotic coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. https://doi.org/10.21037/acs-2023-rcabg-0191. (PMID: 10.21037/acs-2023-rcabg-01913943498011491175)
Claessens J, Packlé L, Oosterbos H, Smeets E, Geens J, Gielen J et al (2024) Totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting: experience in 1500 patients. Interdiscip Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 39(3):ivae159. https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivae159. (PMID: 10.1093/icvts/ivae1593928701611434154)
Zoupas I, Manaki V, Tasoudis PT, Karela NR, Avgerinos DV, Mylonas KS (2024) Totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass graft: systematic review and meta-analysis of reconstructed patient-level data. Innovations (Phila) 19(6):616–625. https://doi.org/10.1177/15569845241296530. (PMID: 10.1177/155698452412965303956725011656624)
Raja SG (2025) New clinical advances in minimally invasive coronary surgery. J Clin Med 14(9):3142. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14093142. (PMID: 10.3390/jcm140931424036417112072981)
Baudo M, Torregrossa G (2025) Robotic coronary artery bypass grafting: current status and future perspectives. Vessel Plus 9(1):13. https://doi.org/10.20517/2574-1209.2025.69. (PMID: 10.20517/2574-1209.2025.69)
Verma A, Kim JJ, Sakowitz S, Sanaiha Y, Hadaya J, Benharash P (2025) Association of robotic assistance with short-term outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg Short Rep 3(3):603–608 PMID:41163903. (PMID: 10.1016/j.atssr.2025.03.0074116390312559596)
Fazmin IT, Ali JM (2025) Hybrid coronary revascularisation: indications, techniques, and outcomes. J Clin Med 14(3):880. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14030880. (PMID: 10.3390/jcm140308803994155111818765)
Schuering CL et al (2025) Conventional hybrid coronary versus robot-assisted minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass in hybrid coronary revascularization: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Cardiovasc Med 12:1650138. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2025.1650138. (PMID: 10.3389/fcvm.2025.16501384140410712702846)
Moreno PR, Stone GW, Gonzalez-Lengua CA, Puskas JD (2020) The hybrid coronary approach for optimal revascularization: JACC review topic of the week. J Am Coll Cardiol 76(3):321–333. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.04.07832674795)
Halkos ME, Vassiliades TA, Douglas JS, Morris DC, Rab ST, Liberman HA et al (2011) Hybrid coronary revascularization versus off-pump coronary artery bypass for the treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease. Ann Thorac Surg 92(5):1695–1701. (PMID: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2011.05.09021939958)
Yu L, Zhu K, Du N, Zhang S, Bai X, Zhao Y (2022) Comparison of hybrid coronary revascularization versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. J Cardiothorac Surg 17:147. (PMID: 10.1186/s13019-022-01903-w356727889175312)
Gong W, Cai J, Wang Z, Chen A, Ye X, Li H, Zhao Q (2016) Robot-assisted coronary artery bypass grafting improves short-term outcomes compared with minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting. J Thorac Dis 8(3):459–468. https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2016.02.67. (PMID: 10.21037/jtd.2016.02.67270769414805807)
Nisivaco S, Kitahara H, Bhasin R et al (2025) A decade of robotic beating-heart totally endoscopic coronary bypass (TECAB) at a single institution: outcomes with 10-year follow-up. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 169:1753–1760 PMID:39116933. (PMID: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2024.07.06039116933)
Aboul-Hassan SS et al (2025) Long-term clinical outcomes of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting. J Clin Med 14(21):7590. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14217590. (PMID: 10.3390/jcm142175904122698712609691)
Ashenhurst C, Toubar O, Guo MH, Issa H, Ponnambalam M, Ruel M (2024) Early and long-term outcomes of less invasive approaches to coronary artery bypass surgery. Vessel Plus 8(1):3. https://doi.org/10.20517/2574-1209.2023.90. (PMID: 10.20517/2574-1209.2023.90)
Poddi S, Rungatscher A (2026) Minimally invasive cardiac surgery: a state-of-the-art review. J Clin Med 15(1):371. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15010371. (PMID: 10.3390/jcm150103714151761812786446)
Zea-Vera R, Ryan CT, Havelka J, Corr SJ, Nguyen TC, Chatterjee S et al (2022) Machine learning to predict outcomes and cost by phase of care after coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg 114(3):711–719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2021.08.040. (PMID: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2021.08.04034582751)
Khalaji A, Behnoush AH, Jameie M, Sharifi A, Sheikhy A, Fallahzadeh A et al (2022) Machine learning algorithms for predicting mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting. Front Cardiovasc Med 9:977747. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.977747. (PMID: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.977747360931479448905)
Chaudhuri K, Pletzer A, Smith NP (2022) A predictive patient-specific computational model of coronary artery bypass grafts for potential use by cardiac surgeons to guide selection of graft configurations. Front Cardiovasc Med 9:953109. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.953109. (PMID: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.953109362379049552835)
Wu W, Panagopoulos AN, Vasa CH, Sharzehee M, Zhao S, Samant S et al (2023) Patient-specific computational simulation of coronary artery bypass grafting. PLoS ONE 18(3):e0281423. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281423. (PMID: 10.1371/journal.pone.0281423368676019983828)
Zhang Y, Cai D, Deng Y, Wang Z, Zhang Z, Zhang H et al (2025) Machine learning based prediction of postoperative acute kidney injury risk in coronary artery bypass grafting patients. Clin Interv Aging 20:2033–2048. https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S543303. (PMID: 10.2147/CIA.S5433034128237712631032)
Manyam R, Lou P, Shen HJ, Liu Z, Zhang Y, Hu X, Keeling WB (2025 Sep) Interpretable artificial intelligence to predict preoperative risk factors for failure to rescue after coronary artery bypass grafting. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2025.09.039.
Balkhy HH, Nisivaco S, Kitahara H et al (2022) Robotic advanced hybrid coronary revascularization: Outcomes with two internal thoracic artery grafts and stents. JTCVS Tech 16:76–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xjtc.2022.08.012. (PMID: 10.1016/j.xjtc.2022.08.012365105269735326)
Othenin-Girard A, Ltaief Z, Verdugo-Marchese M, Lavanchy L, Vuadens P, Nowacka A, Gunga Z, Melly V, Abdurashidova T, Botteau C et al (2025) Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Protocols in Cardiac Surgery: Impact on Opioid Consumption. J Clin Med 14(5):1768. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14051768. (PMID: 10.3390/jcm140517684009586011901073)
Gianoli M, de Jong AR, van der Harst P, van der Kaaij NP, Jacob KA, Suyker WJL (2024) Innovations: Technol Techniques Cardiothorac Vascular Surg 19(4):416–424. https://doi.org/10.1177/15569845241269312 . Cost Analysis of Robot-Assisted Versus On-Pump and Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Single-Center Surgical and 30-Day Outcomes Comparison.
Contributed Indexing: Keywords: CABG; Coronary artery bypass grafting; Coronary artery disease; Hybrid coronary revascularisation; Left anterior descending artery; Left internal mammary artery; MIDCAB; Minimally invasive cardiac surgery; Robotic CABG; TECAB
Entry Date(s): Date Created: 20260726 Date Completed: 20260726 Latest Revision: 20260726
Update Code: 20260727
DOI: 10.1007/s11701-026-03737-3
PMID: 42503540
Database: MEDLINE
Description
ISSN:1863-2491
DOI:10.1007/s11701-026-03737-3