Intensive Care Unit Bypass for Robotic-Assisted Single-Vessel Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

BACKGROUND Fast-track and enhanced recovery after cardiac surgical procedures have shown reductions in intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital lengths of stay, with unchanged outcomes. However, cost reduction by an ultra-fast-track protocol after minimally invasive cardiac operations, without compromising clinical benefits, has yet to be demonstrated.METHODS A total of 215 consecutive patients underwent robotic-assisted coronary artery bypass grafting, with 156 preoperatively stratified into conventional ICU recovery vs 59 candidates for a defined ICU-bypass protocol involving recovery room and floor care. Of these, 40 candidates completed the protocol, and 19 had conversion-to-ICU recovery. Because of right-skewed distribution, inpatient cost was log-transformed, and linear regression models were con-structed to estimate geometric mean ratios (GMRs) comparing inpatient cost for these groups (conventional ICU re-covery, ICU-bypass, conversion-to-ICU recovery), adjusted for The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score. RESULTS Compared with the conventional ICU group, the ICU-bypass group conferred a 15% reduction in total inpatient (GMR, 0.85; P = .0007) and a 14% reduction in total variable direct costs (GMR, 0.86; P = .003). Compared with the conventional ICU group, the ICU-bypass and conversion-to-ICU groups had similar net hospital stay reductions (1.6-1.7 days). Relative to the conventional ICU group, ICU and floor duration were shortened after conversion to ICU, with a trend to reduced costs. Cardiac arrest, 30-day mortality, and stroke were absent, and other key adverse events did not differ between groups.CONCLUSIONS A selective, successful ultra-fast-track ICU-bypass protocol for robotic-assisted coronary artery bypass grafting reduces inpatient cost without affecting short-term outcomes. Conversion-to-ICU recovery also maintains outcomes and trends toward reduced costs.(Ann Thorac Surg 2023;115:511-8)(c) 2023 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons