Ministernotomy versus conventional sternotomy for aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Mini-Bentall: An Interesting Approach for Selected Patients

OBJECTIVE

Minimally invasive surgery through an upper hemisternotomy for aortic valve replacement has become the routine approach with excellent results. Actually, the same minimally invasive access is used for complex ascending aorta procedures only in few centers. We report our experience with minimally invasive approach for aortic valve and ascending aorta replacement using Bentall technique.

METHODS

From January 2010 to November 2015, a total of 238 patients received ascending aorta and aortic valve replacement using Bentall De Bono procedure at our institution. Low- and intermediate-risk patients underwent elective surgery with a minimally invasive approach. The "J"-shaped partial upper sternotomy was performed through a 6-cm skin incision from the notch to the third right intercostal space. Patients who had previous cardiac surgery or affected by active endocarditis were excluded. The study included 53 patients, 44 male (83 %) with a median age of 63 years [interquartile range (IQR), 51-73 years]. A bicuspid aortic valve was diagnosed in 27 patients (51%).

RESULTS

A biological Bentall using a pericardial Mitroflow or Crown bioprosthesis implanted in a Valsalva graft was performed in 49 patents. The remaining four patients were treated with a traditional mechanical conduit. Median cardiopulmonary bypass time and median cross-clamp time were respectively 84 (IQR, 75-103) minutes and 73 (IQR, 64-89) minutes. Hospital mortality was zero as well as 30-day mortality. Median intensive care unit and hospital stay were 1.9 and 8 days, respectively. The study population compared with patients treated with standard full sternotomy and similar preoperative characteristics showed similar results in terms of postoperative outcomes with a slightly superiority of minimally invasive group mainly regarding operative times, incidence of atrial fibrillation, and postoperative ventilation times.

CONCLUSIONS

A partial upper sternotomy is considered a safe option for aortic valve replacement. Our experience confirms that a minimally invasive approach using a partial upper J-shaped sternotomy can be a safe alternative approach to the standard in selected patients presenting with complex aortic root pathology.

Traditional Sternotomy Versus Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients Stratified by Ejection Fraction

OBJECTIVE

Low ejection fraction (EF < 40%) portends adverse outcomes in patients undergoing valvular heart surgery. The role of traditional median sternotomy aortic valve replacement (SAVR) compared with minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MIAVR) in this cohort remains incompletely understood.

METHODS

A multi-institutional retrospective review of 1503 patients who underwent SAVR (n = 815) and MIAVR via right anterior thoracotomy (n = 688) from 2011 to 2014 was performed. Patients were stratified into two groups: EF of less than 40% and EF of 40% or more. In each EF group, SAVR and MIAVR patients were propensity matched by age, sex, body mass index, race, diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, dialysis, cerebrovascular disease, cardiovascular disease, cerebrovascular accident, peripheral vascular disease, last creatinine level, EF, previous MI and cardiogenic shock, and the Society for Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score.

RESULTS

Among patients with an EF of 40% or more (377 pairs), patients who underwent MIAVR compared with SAVR had decreased intensive care unit hours (56.8% vs 84.6%, P < 0.001), postoperative length of stay (7.1 vs 7.9 days, P = 0.04), incidence of atrial fibrillation (18.8% vs 38.7%, P < 0.001), bleeding (0.8% vs 3.2%, P = 0.04), and a trend toward decreased 30-day mortality (0.3% vs 1.3%, P = 0.22). The STS scores were largely equivalent in patients undergoing MIAVR compared with SAVR (2.4% vs 2.6%, P = 0.09). In patients with an EF of less than 40% (35 pairs), there was no difference in intensive care unit hours (69% vs 72.6%, P = 0.80), postoperative length of stay (10.3 vs 7.2 days, P = 0.13), 30-day mortality (3.8% vs 0.8%, P = 0.50), or the STS score (3.3% vs 3.2%, P = 0.68).

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement in patients with preserved EF was associated with improved short-term outcomes compared with SAVR. In patients with left ventricular dysfunction, short-term outcomes between MIAVR and SAVR are largely equivalent.

Respiratory System Function in Patients after Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement Surgery

Objective

The aim of the study was to comparatively analyze respiratory system function after minimally invasive, through right minithoracotomy aortic valve replacement (RT-AVR) to conventional AVR.

Methods

Analysis of 201 patients scheduled for RT-AVR and 316 for AVR between January 2010 and November 2013. Complications of the respiratory system and pulmonary functional status are presented.

Results

Complications of the respiratory system occurred in 16.8% of AVR and 11.0% of RT-AVR patients ( P = 0.067). The rate of pleural effusions, thoracenteses, pneumonias, or phrenic nerve dysfunctions was not significantly different between groups. Perioperative mortality was 1.9% in AVR and 1.0% in RT-AVR ( P = 0.417). Mechanical ventilation time after surgery was 9.7 ± 5.9 hours for AVR and 7.2 ±3.2 hours for RT-AVR patients ( P < 0.001). Stroke (odds ratio [OR] = 13.4, P = 0.008), increased postoperative blood loss (OR = 9.6, P <0.001), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR = 7.7, P < 0.001) were risk factors of prolonged mechanical lung ventilation. A week after surgery, the results of most pulmonary function tests were lower in the AVR than in the RT-AVR group ( P < 0.001 was seen for forced expiratory volume in the first second, vital capacity, total lung capacity, maximum inspiratory pressure and maximum expiratory pressure, P = 0.377 was seen for residual volume).

Conclusions

Right anterior aortic valve replacement minithoracotomy surgery with single-lung ventilation did not result in increased rate of respiratory system complications. Spirometry examinations revealed that pulmonary functional status was more impaired after AVR in comparison with RT-AVR surgery.

Early results of the Sorin® Perceval S sutureless valve: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MAVR) has demonstrated a benefit with respect to increased patient satisfaction due to minimised pain and earlier recovery. Sutureless valves may benefit MAVR and conventional aortic valve replacement (AVR) by reducing operative times and blood transfusion requirements. The Perceval valve (Sorin, Salluggia, Italy) is a self-expanding prosthesis made from bovine pericardium mounted in a nitinol stent, designed to simplify the implantation of an aortic valve. This meta-analysis evaluates the clinical, haemodynamic, and survival outcomes of the Perceval sutureless valve.

METHODS

An electronic search of 4 databases was performed from January 2000 to December 2016. Primary outcomes included mortality and stroke. Secondary outcomes included minimally invasive access, paravalvular leak, overall long-term survival, postoperative echocardiographic findings, and functional class improvement.

RESULTS

After the application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, 14 of 66 relevant articles were selected for assessment. Of these 14 studies, a total number of 2,505 patients were included. The current evidence on the Perceval valve for aortic valve disease is limited to observational studies only. Minimally invasive surgery was performed in 976 patients, of which 336 were via the right anterior thoracotomy approach. The Perceval M and L sutureless valves were the most frequently used, 782 and 770 respectively. The incidence of major adverse events included 30-day mortality (0 to 4.9%), cerebrovascular accident (0 to 3%), permanent pacemaker insertion (0 to 17%), moderate to severe paravalvular leak (0 to 8.6%), and re-operation (0 to 4.8%). Post-operative mean aortic valve gradient ranged from 9 to 15.9 mmHg and post-operative New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class I or II ranged from 82% to 96%. The 1-year survival ranged from 86% to 100%; and 5-year survival was 71.3% to 85.5% in two studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The Perceval valve is associated with excellent post-operative results in MAVR and in conventional AVR. Larger randomised controlled studies are required to evaluate the long-term efficacy of the prosthesis.

Minimally Invasive Versus Conventional Aortic Valve Replacement: A Propensity-Matched Study From the UK National Data

Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MIAVR) has been demonstrated as a safe and effective option but remains underused. We aimed to evaluate outcomes of isolated MIAVR compared with conventional aortic valve replacement (CAVR).

Current Clinical Evidence on Rapid Deployment Aortic Valve Replacement: Sutureless Aortic Bioprostheses

Aortic stenosis is the most common valvular heart disease in the Western world. It is caused primarily by age-related degeneration and progressive calcification typically detected in patients 65 years and older. In patients presenting with symptoms of heart failure, the average survival rate is only 2 years without appropriate treatment. Approximately one half of all patients die within the first 2 to 3 years of symptom onset. In addition, the age of the patients presenting for aortic valve replacement (AVR) is increased along with the demographic changes. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) database shows that the number of patients older than 80 years has increased from 12% to 24% during the past 20 years. At the same time, the percentage of candidates requiring AVR as well as concomitant coronary bypass surgery has increased from 5% to 25%. Surgical AVR continues to be the criterion standard for treatment of aortic stenosis, improving survival and quality of life. Recent advances in prosthetic valve technology, such as transcatheter AVR, have expanded the indication for AVR to the extreme high-risk population, and the most recent surgical innovation, rapid deployment AVR, provides an additional tool to the surgeons’ armamentarium.

Reliability of Percutaneous Pulmonary Vent and Coronary Sinus Cardioplegia in the Setting of Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement: A Single-Center Experience

OBJECTIVES

Evaluating the efficacy of 2 new percutaneous devices specifically designed to be placed through the right internal jugular vein, therefore named "necklines," for achieving retrograde cardioplegia and pulmonary venting in the setting of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MIAVR).

DESIGN

Case series.

SETTING

University-affiliated private hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients undergoing MIAVR.

INTERVENTIONS

Necklines were placed by the anesthesiologist using transesophageal electrocardiography, with pressure guidance before the surgical procedure was initiated.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The records of 51 consecutive patients who underwent MIAVR with necklines placement were reviewed retrospectively. The access for MIAVR was through either a J-hemisternotomy or a right anterior thoracotomy. The efficacy of the 2 catheters, successful placement rate, time needed to deploy catheters, and perioperative complications were recorded. Necklines were placed successfully in all patients in 23±13 minutes. A total of 110 doses of retrograde cardioplegia were delivered at a mean flow rate of 173±35 mL/min and a mean pressure of 41±6 mmHg. The pulmonary catheter ensured venting of the heart that was graded by surgeons as "excellent" in 33 patients, "sufficient" in 12 patients, and "not adequate" in 2 patients. There were no major adverse events or deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Necklines ensure effective retrograde cardioplegia and venting of the heart, provide optimal surgical vision and access during MIAVR, and allow surgeons to operate in an unobstructed surgical field. Nevertheless, additional studies are required to determine whether the use of necklines is associated with better outcomes than those with conventional methods.

Sutureless Aortic Valves: Combining the Best or the Worst?

Aortic valve replacement is a life saving intervention. Significant progress has been made toward reducing surgical trauma through minimally invasive surgery and transcatheter techniques. Each of these approaches has its advantages and limitations. Sutureless aortic valves have been proposed to overcome these limitations and have been in use in Europe. It is however less than clear whether these valves will prove advantageous and whether they will have a role in the future. We review the published literature for sutureless aortic valves and their performance against standard and transcatheter aortic valve replacements.

Recent advances in aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis

Aortic valve replacement is no longer an operation that is approached solely through a median sternotomy. Recent advances in the fields of transcatheter valves have expanded the proportion of patients eligible for intervention. Comparisons between transcatheter valves and conventional surgery have shown non-inferiority of transcatheter valve implants in patients with a high or intermediate pre-operative predictive risk. With advances in our understanding of sutureless valves and their applicability to minimally invasive surgery, the invasiveness and trauma of surgery can be reduced with potential improvements in outcome. The strategy of care has radically changed over the last decade.

The economic value of INTUITY in aortic valve replacement

OBJECTIVE

The recent development of the EDWARDS INTUITY Elite™ (EIE) valve system enables the rapid deployment of a prosthetic surgical heart valve in an aortic valve replacement (AVR) procedure via both the minimally invasive (MISAVR) and conventional (CAVR) approaches. In order to understand its economic value, this study performed a cost evaluation of the EIE valve system used in a MIS rapid-deployment approach (MIS-RDAVR) vs MISAVR and CAVR, respectively, compared to standard prosthetic aortic valves.

METHODS

A simulation model was developed using TreeAge (and validated with MS Excel) to compare the inpatient utilization and complication costs for each treatment arm. Thirty-day clinical end-points for the MIS-RDAVR (mortality and complications) were taken from the TRANSFORM trial; and a best evidence review of the published literature was used for the MISAVR and CAVR approaches. Studies were pooled and parameter estimates were weighted by sample size in order to compare the TRANSFORM patients. Cost data (2016 USD) were taken from the Premier database. Incremental cost and cost-effectiveness was assessed and one-way/probabilistic sensitivity analyses performed to gauge the robustness of the results.

RESULTS

MIS-RDAVR costs $2,621 less than CAVR and had lower mortality rates, making it a superior (dominant) technology relative to CAVR. MIS-RDAVR costs $4,560 more than MISAVR, but was associated with an additional 0.20 life years-per-patient. This implies a cost-effectiveness ratio of $22,903 per-life-year-gained. Thus, MIS-RDAVR is cost-effective compared to MISAVR.

CONCLUSIONS

The EIE valve system deployed in a MIS approach appears to be a cost-effective technology compared to MISAVR and CAVR. When compared to CAVR it may achieve cost savings as well. These results suggest that MIS-RDAVR confers superior economic value compared to both standard MISAVR and CAVR via lowered key complication rates (re-operation, renal complications, wound infection, TIA, endocarditis) and utilization (cross-clamp time, hospital ward days).

Reversed L-type Upper Partial Sternotomy in Aortic Valve Replacement: an Initial Experience

Introduction:

Degenerative aortic stenosis (AS) is the most frequent cause among aortic valve stenotic changes. Mini Sternotomy Aortic Valve Replacement is a replacement of aortic valve through upper partial sternotomy.

Aim:

The aim of this approach is to improve postoperative convalescence by leaving pleural spaces closed and do not compromise respiratory function, to decrease bleeding, and reduce post op ventilation time and ICU stay. All these advantages decrease cost during hospital stay by reducing ICU stay, respiration time, bleeding and using blood products, pain killers and shortening hospital stay. Esthetic effect is also considerable result of this method.

Case report:

This case report presents an initial experience with Reversed L-Type Upper Partial Sternotomy in Aortic Valve Replacement. The goal is to demonstrate that minimally invasive advanced cardiac surgery procedures can be performed in our country.

Aortic valve replacement with sutureless and rapid deployment aortic valve prostheses

Aortic valve stenosis is the most common valve disease in the western world. Over the past few years the number of aortic valve replacement (AVR) interventions has increased with outcomes that have been improved despite increasing age of patients and increasing burden of comorbidities. However, despite such excellent results and its well-established position, conventional AVR has undergone great development over the previous two decades. Such progress, by way of less invasive incisions and use of new technologies, including transcatheter aortic valve implantation and sutureless valve prostheses, is intended to reduce the traumatic impact of the surgical procedure, thus fulfilling lower risk patients' expectations on the one hand, and extending the operability toward increasingly high-risk patients on the other. Sutureless and rapid deployment aortic valves are biological, pericardial prostheses that anchor within the aortic annulus with no more than three sutures. The sutureless prostheses, by avoiding the passage and the tying of the sutures, significantly reduce operative times and may improve outcomes. However, there is still a paucity of robust, evidence-based data on the role and performance of sutureless AVR. Therefore, strongest long-term data, randomized studies and registry data are required to adequately assess the durability and long-term outcomes of sutureless aortic valve replacement.

Del Nido cardioplegia in the setting of minimally invasive aortic valve surgery

The purpose of this study is to report our experience with del Nido cardioplegia (DNC) in the setting of minimally invasive aortic valve surgery. Forty-six consecutive patients underwent minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (AVR) through a “J” ministernotomy: twenty-five patients received the DNC (Group 1) and 21 patients received standard blood cardioplegia (SBC) (Group 2). The rate of ventricular fibrillation at unclamping was significantly lower in the DNC group (12% vs 52%, p=0.004), as well as postoperative creatinine kinase-MB (CK-MB) values (11.4±5.2 vs 17.7±6.9 µg/L, p=0.004). There were no deaths, myocardial infarctions or major complications in either group. Less postoperative use of intravenous insulin (28% vs 81%, p<0.001) was registered in the DNC group. In conclusion, the DNC is easy to use and safe during minimally invasive AVR, providing a myocardial protection at least equivalent to our SBC, improved surgical efficiency, minimal cost and less blood glucose perturbations.

Heart Valve Replacements with Regenerative Capacity

The incidence of severe valvular dysfunctions (e.g., stenosis and insufficiency) is increasing, leading to over 300,000 valves implanted worldwide yearly. Clinically used heart valve replacements lack the capacity to grow, inherently requiring repetitive and high-risk surgical interventions during childhood. The aim of this review is to present how different tissue engineering strategies can overcome these limitations, providing innovative valve replacements that proved to be able to integrate and remodel in pre-clinical experiments and to have promising results in clinical studies. Upon description of the different types of heart valve tissue engineering (e.g., in vitro, in situ, in vivo, and the pre-seeding approach) we focus on the clinical translation of this technology. In particular, we will deepen the many technical, clinical, and regulatory aspects that need to be solved to endure the clinical adaptation and the commercialization of these promising regenerative valves.

A comparison of minimally invasive and standard aortic valve replacement

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to compare aortic valve replacement through a right anterior minithoracotomy with aortic valve replacement through a median sternotomy.

METHODS

With propensity score matching, we selected 211 patients after aortic valve replacement through a right anterior minithoracotomy and 211 patients after aortic valve replacement who underwent operation between January 2010 and December 2013. Perioperative outcomes were analyzed, and multivariable logistic regression analysis of risk factors of postoperative morbidity was performed.

RESULTS

For propensity score-matched patients, hospital mortality was 1.0% in the aortic valve replacement through a right anterior minithoracotomy group and 1.4% in the aortic valve replacement group (P = 1.000). Stroke occurred in 0.5% versus 1.4% (P = .615), myocardial infarction occurred in 1.4% versus 1.9% (P = 1.000), and new onset of atrial fibrillation occurred in 12.8% versus 24.2% (P = .003) of patients in the aortic valve replacement through a right anterior minithoracotomy and aortic valve replacement groups, respectively. Postoperative drainage was 353.5 ± 248.6 mL versus 544.3 ± 324.5 mL (P < .001) and blood transfusion was required for 48.8% versus 67.3% (P < .001) of patients in the aortic valve replacement through a right anterior minithoracotomy and aortic valve replacement groups, respectively. Mediastinitis occurred in 2.8% of patients after aortic valve replacement and in 0.0% of patients after aortic valve replacement through a right anterior minithoracotomy surgery (P = .040). Intensive care unit stay (1.3 ± 1.2 days vs 2.6 ± 2.6 days) and hospital stay (5.7 ± 1.6 days vs 8.7 ± 4.4 days) were statistically significantly shorter in the aortic valve replacement through a right anterior minithoracotomy group. Aortic valve replacement through a right anterior minithoracotomy surgery resulted in reduced postoperative morbidity (odds ratio, 0.4; P < .001) and postoperative bleeding and blood transfusion requirements (odds ratio, 0.4; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Aortic valve replacement through a right anterior minithoracotomy surgery resulted in a reduced infection rate, diminished postoperative bleeding and blood transfusion requirements, reduced occurrence of new onset of atrial fibrillation, and shorter intensive care unit and hospital stays.

Mini-aortic surgery with percutaneous cannulation and rapid-deployment valve

Background

We aimed to evaluate the results of the combined use of rapid-deployment valves, percutaneous cardioplegia delivery and left heart venting during minimally invasive aortic valve replacement surgery.

Methods

We identified 2 propensity-matched cohorts of patients who underwent primary elective isolated minimally invasive aortic valve surgery at our center over a 3-years period: 30 patients in group A had a conventional valve prosthesis and 30 patients in group B received a rapid-deployment valve using percutaneous cardioplegia delivery and percutaneous left heart venting. Skin incision length, intraoperative times, postoperative hospital outcomes, and 30-day echocardiographic results were compared between the 2 groups.

Results

Patients in group B had significantly shorter operative times and shorter skin incisions compared to group A (total operative time 196.0 ± 40.6 vs. 225.1 ± 30.8 min, respectively, p < 0.003; cardiopulmonary bypass time 79.9 ± 10.6 vs. 92.9 ± 17.2 min respectively, p < 0.001; crossclamp time 52.3 ± 9.6 vs. 74.9 ± 10.2 min, respectively, p < 0.001; incision length 3.6 ± 0.5 vs. 6.0 ± 0.6 cm, respectively, p < 0.001). Postoperative hospital outcomes and echocardiographic evaluation showed no significant differences.

Conclusions

The combined use of rapid-deployment valves, percutaneous cardioplegia, and left heart venting is safe and effective and allows a significant reduction of the skin incision together with a significant reduction of intraoperative times without affecting hospital outcomes or hemodynamic performance of the prosthetic valves.

Function of the Respiratory System in Elderly Patients After Aortic Valve Replacement

OBJECTIVE

To compare the function of the respiratory system after aortic valve replacement through median sternotomy (AVR) or the minimally invasive right anterior minithoracotomy (RAT-AVR) approach among elderly (aged≥75 years) patients.

DESIGN

Observational cohort study.

SETTINGS

University hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

The study included 65 elderly patients scheduled for RAT-AVR and 82 for standard AVR.

INTERVENTIONS

Pulmonary function tests (PFT) were performed preoperatively, 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months after surgery. In addition, respiratory complications were analyzed.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Respiratory complications occurred in 12.3% of patients in the RAT-AVR group and 18.3% of patients in the AVR group (p = 0.445). Mechanical ventilation time in the intensive care unit was 7.7±3.6 hours for RAT-AVR patients and 9.7±5.4 hours for AVR patients (p = 0.003). Most PFT were worse in the AVR group than in the RAT-AVR group when performed 1 week after surgery. After 1 month, forced expiratory volume in the first second, vital capacity, and total lung capacity differed significantly in favor of the RAT-AVR group (p = 0.002, p<0.001, and p = 0.001, respectively). After 3 months, the PFT parameters still had not returned to preoperative values, but the differences were no longer significant between the RAT-AVR and AVR groups. The multivariable median regression analysis demonstrated that RAT-AVR surgery was a key factor in a patient's higher postoperative PFT parameter values.

CONCLUSIONS

RAT-AVR surgery resulted in shorter postoperative mechanical ventilation time and improved the recovery of pulmonary function in elderly patients, but it did not reduce the incidence of pulmonary complications when compared with surgery performed through a median sternotomy.

Exploring the learning curve for minimally invasive sutureless aortic valve replacement

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to assess the learning process and quality of care of right minithoracotomy aortic valve replacement with a sutureless bioprosthesis at a single institution.

METHODS

We performed an analysis of the first 300 consecutive patients (aged 76 ± 6 years; logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation 9 ± 6) who underwent sutureless valve implantation via a right minithoracotomy by 6 surgeons at the G. Pasquinucci Heart Hospital between 2011 and 2015. The learning curve was analyzed by dividing the study population into tertiles of 100 patients each. Departmental and individual learning curves were calculated using sequential probability cumulative sum failure analysis. Quality indicators were 2 composite end points reflecting the technical success and 30-day complications.

RESULTS

The overall mortality was 0.7% (2 patients). No significant differences were noted in terms of mortality and complications between tertiles. The sutureless valve was implanted successfully in 99% of patients (298/300). Cumulative sum analysis failed to identify any significant learning effects for technical success. Nevertheless, surgeons A, B, and C had a small initial learning curve, and surgeons D, E, and F did not, reflecting a trend toward a positive effect of cumulative institutional experience on the individual learning curve. The 30-day complications analysis revealed a cluster of failures at the beginning of the experience. This cluster prompted an internal audit and modification of the patients' selection process. Consecutively, the procedure returned in control.

CONCLUSIONS

Right minithoracotomy sutureless valve implantation can be performed safely without learning curve effects. Cumulative sum analysis is a valuable tool to describe and monitor the learning process. The analysis can identify periods of less than expected performance and alert the team to react.

Effects of MIAVS on Early Postoperative ELWI and Respiratory Mechanics

Background

The effects of minimally invasive aortic valve surgery (MIAVS) on the early postoperative extravascular lung water index (ELWI) and respiratory mechanics have rarely been studied.

Material/Methods

A total of 90 patients were divided into 3 groups: a conventional full sternotomy (CS) group (n=30), an upper ministernotomy (US) group (n=30), and a right anterior thoracotomy (RT) group (n=30). Hemodynamic and respiratory mechanics parameters were recorded at perioperative time points, including before skin incision (T(−1)); at sternum closing (T0); and 4 h (T4), 8 h (T8), 12 h (T12), and 24 h (T24) after the operation. The ventilator support time, ICU length of stay, and postoperative hospitalization time, as well as the thoracic drainage volume and blood transfusion volume, were recorded.

Results

The ELWI and pulmonary vascular permeability index (PVPI) increased at T4, and the values were significantly lower in the US group than in the RT group and CS group (P<0.05). At T8, the ELWI and PVPI in the US group and RT group were significantly lower than in the CS group. At T12, there were no significant differences among the 3 groups. In addition, at T4 static lung compliance decreased, plateau airway pressure increased, and airway resistance changed non-significantly. There were no significant differences between the US group and the RT group, but both groups showed better results than the CS group did.

Conclusions

The ELWI and PVPI may transiently increase after aortic valve surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. Compared with the 12 h required to recover from a conventional sternotomy operation, it may only take 8 h to recover from MIAVS.

Conventional versus rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement: a single-centre comparison between the Edwards Magna valve and its rapid-deployment successor

OBJECTIVES

Sutureless and rapid-deployment valves were recently introduced into clinical practice. The Edwards INTUITY valve system is a combination of the Edwards Magna pericardial valve and a subvalvular stent-frame to enable rapid deployment. We performed a parallel cohort study for comparison of the two valve types.

METHODS

All patients receiving either an Edwards Magna Ease valve or an Edwards INTUITY valve system due to aortic stenosis from May 2010 until July 2014 were included. Patients undergoing bypass surgery, an additional valve procedure, atrial ablation surgery or replacement of the ascending aorta were excluded. Preoperative characteristics, operative specifications, survival, valve-related adverse events and transvalvulvar gradients were compared.

RESULTS

One hundred sixteen patients underwent rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement [mean age 75 years (SD: 8); 62% female] and 132 patients underwent conventional aortic valve replacement [70 years (SD: 9); 31% female; P < 0.001]. Conventional valve patients were taller and heavier. The mean EuroSCORE II was 3.1% (SD: 2.7) and 4.4% (SD: 6.0) for rapid-deployment and conventional valve patients, respectively (P = 0.085). The mean implanted valve size was higher in the conventional group [23.2 mm (SD: 2.0) vs 22.5 mm (SD: 2.2); P = 0.007], but postoperative transvalvular mean gradients were comparable [15 mmHg (SD: 6) vs 14 mmHg (SD: 5); P = 0.457]. A subgroup analysis of the most common valve sizes (21 and 23 mm; implanted in 63% of patients) revealed significantly reduced mean postoperative transvalvular gradients in the rapid-deployment group [14 mmHg (SD: 4) vs 16 mmHg (SD: 5); P = 0.025]. A significantly higher percentage received minimally invasive procedures in the rapid-deployment group (59 vs 39%; P < 0.001). The 1- and 3-year survival rate was 96 and 90% in the rapid-deployment group and 95 and 89% in the conventional group (P = 0.521), respectively. Valve-related pacemaker implantations were more common in the rapid-deployment group (9 vs 2%; P = 0.014) and postoperative stroke was more common in the conventional group (1.6 vs 0% per patient year; P = 0.044).

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that this rapid-deployment valve probably facilitates minimally invasive surgery. Furthermore, a subgroup analysis showed reduced transvalvular gradients in smaller valve sizes compared with the conventionally implanted valve of the same type. The favourable haemodynamic profile and the potentially different spectrum of valve-related adverse events should be addressed in further clinical trials.

Calcific aortic stenosis

Calcific aortic stenosis (AS) is the most prevalent heart valve disorder in developed countries. It is characterized by progressive fibro-calcific remodelling and thickening of the aortic valve leaflets that, over years, evolve to cause severe obstruction to cardiac outflow. In developed countries, AS is the third-most frequent cardiovascular disease after coronary artery disease and systemic arterial hypertension, with a prevalence of 0.4% in the general population and 1.7% in the population >65 years old. Congenital abnormality (bicuspid valve) and older age are powerful risk factors for calcific AS. Metabolic syndrome and an elevated plasma level of lipoprotein(a) have also been associated with increased risk of calcific AS. The pathobiology of calcific AS is complex and involves genetic factors, lipoprotein deposition and oxidation, chronic inflammation, osteoblastic transition of cardiac valve interstitial cells and active leaflet calcification. Although no pharmacotherapy has proved to be effective in reducing the progression of AS, promising therapeutic targets include lipoprotein(a), the renin-angiotensin system, receptor activator of NF-κB ligand (RANKL; also known as TNFSF11) and ectonucleotidases. Currently, aortic valve replacement (AVR) remains the only effective treatment for severe AS. The diagnosis and staging of AS are based on the assessment of stenosis severity and left ventricular systolic function by Doppler echocardiography, and the presence of symptoms. The introduction of transcatheter AVR in the past decade has been a transformative therapeutic innovation for patients at high or prohibitive risk for surgical valve replacement, and this new technology might extend to lower-risk patients in the near future.

Preoperative planning of left-sided valve surgery with 3D computed tomography reconstruction models: sternotomy or a minimally invasive approach?

OBJECTIVES

With the emergence of a new concept aimed at individualization of patient care, the focus will shift from whether a minimally invasive procedure is better than conventional treatment, to the question of which patients will benefit most from which technique? The superiority of minimally invasive valve surgery (MIVS) has not yet been proved. We believe that through better patient selection advantages of this technique can become more pronounced. In our current study, we evaluate the feasibility of 3D computed tomography (CT) imaging reconstruction in the preoperative planning of patients referred for MIVS.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed all consecutive patients who were referred for minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) and minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MIAVR) to a single surgeon in a tertiary referral centre for MIVS between March 2014 and 2015. Prospective preoperative planning was done for all patients and was based on evaluations by a multidisciplinary heart-team, an echocardiography, conventional CT images and 3D CT reconstruction models.

RESULTS

A total of 39 patients were included in our study; 16 for mitral valve surgery (MVS) and 23 patients for aortic valve replacement (AVR). Eleven patients (69%) within the MVS group underwent MIMVS. Five patients (31%) underwent conventional MVS. Findings leading to exclusion for MIMVS were a tortuous or slender femoro-iliac tract, calcification of the aortic bifurcation, aortic elongation and pericardial calcifications. Furthermore, 2 patients had a change of operative strategy based on preoperative planning. Seventeen (74%) patients in the AVR group underwent MIAVR. Six patients (26%) underwent conventional AVR. Indications for conventional AVR instead of MIAVR were an elongated ascending aorta, ascending aortic calcification and ascending aortic dilatation. One patient (6%) in the MIAVR group was converted to a sternotomy due to excessive intraoperative bleeding. Two mortalities were reported during conventional MVS. There were no mortalities reported in the MIMVS, MIAVR or conventional AVR group.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative planning of minimally invasive left-sided valve surgery with 3D CT reconstruction models is a useful and feasible method to determine operative strategy and exclude patients ineligible for a minimally invasive approach, thus potentially preventing complications.

Early outcomes after isolated aortic valve replacement with rapid deployment aortic valve

OBJECTIVE

Minimal access aortic valve replacement is associated with favorable clinical outcomes; however, several meta-analyses have reported significantly longer crossclamp times compared with a full sternotomy. We examined the procedural and early safety outcomes after isolated rapid deployment aortic valve replacement by surgical approach in patients enrolled in the Surgical Treatment of Aortic Stenosis With a Next Generation Surgical Aortic Valve trial.

METHODS

The Surgical Treatment of Aortic Stenosis With a Next Generation Surgical Aortic Valve trial was a prospective, multicenter, single-arm study, with successful implants in 287 patients with aortic valve stenosis who underwent rapid deployment aortic valve replacement using the EDWARDS INTUITY Valve System (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, Calif). Patients were evaluated perioperatively for procedural times and technical success rates; at discharge, for hospital length of stay; and, at 30 days, for early adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 158 patients underwent isolated aortic valve replacement through a full sternotomy (n = 71), upper hemisternotomy (n = 77), or right anterior thoracotomy (n = 10). Mean age at baseline was 75.7 ± 7.2 years. Mean aortic crossclamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times (minutes) were similar for full sternotomy and upper hemisternotomy, 43.5 ± 32.5/71.6 ± 41.8 and 43.1 ± 13.1/69.6 ± 19.1, respectively, and significantly longer for right anterior thoracotomy, 88.3 ± 18.6/122.2 ± 22.1 (P < .000). Early adverse event rates were similar, and in-hospital mortality rates were low regardless of surgical approach.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that isolated rapid deployment aortic valve replacement through an upper hemisternotomy can lead to shorter crossclamp times than has been reported historically in the literature. This may facilitate minimal access aortic valve replacement by eliminating the issue of prolonged crossclamp times. Further, low in-hospital mortality and new permanent pacemaker implant rates were observed regardless of surgical approach.

Aortic Hemiarch Replacement through a J-Shaped Lower Partial Sternotomy

Minimally invasive cardiac surgical techniques include the use of partial sternotomy for aortic valve and mitral valve replacement. Partial sternotomy is associated with less pain, better chest and upper-sternal stability, shorter hospital stays, and faster recoveries. However, aortic arch operations are still typically performed through median sternotomies. We describe the case of a 77-year-old woman who underwent elective hemiarch replacement because of an asymptomatic ascending aortic aneurysm. She requested a minimal incision. Our J-shaped partial lower sternotomy adequately exposed the proximal aorta and enabled all cannulations to be performed through the sternotomy. The patient had an uncomplicated postoperative course. We think that a partial sternotomy for ascending aortic and hemiarch replacement can be considered in selected patients for whom the procedure's benefits are important.

Surgery of the Ascending Aorta with or without Combined Procedures through an Upper Ministernotomy: Outcomes of a Series of More Than 100 Patients

BACKGROUND

Use of a minimally invasive approach for isolated aortic valve surgery is increasing. However, management of the root and/or ascending aorta through a mini-invasive incision is not so frequent. The aim of this study is to report our initial experience with surgery of the ascending aorta through a ministernotomy approach.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 102 patients treated for ascending aorta disease through a ministernotomy. Several types of surgeries were performed, including isolated or combined surgical procedures. Pre-operative and operative parameters and in-hospital clinical outcomes were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Patient mean age was 63.9 ± 13.6 years (range 29-85). There were 33 (32.4%) female and 69 (67.6%) male patients. Preoperative logistic EuroSCORE I was 7.4% ± 2.1%. Mean cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross-clamp time were 123.7 ± 36.9 and 100.8 ± 27.5 min, respectively. In-hospital mortality was 0%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience shows that surgery of the ascending aorta with or without combined procedures can be safely performed through an upper ministernotomy, without compromising surgical results. Although our series is not large, we believe that the experience gained on the isolated aortic valve through a ministernotomy can be safely reproduced in ascending aorta surgery as a routine practice.

Upper ministernotomy

During the past 50 years, median sternotomy has been the gold standard approach in cardiac surgery with excellent long-term outcomes. However, since the 1990 s, minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) has gained wide acceptance due to patient and economic demand. The advantages include less surgical trauma, less bleeding, less wound infections, less pain and faster recovery of the patients. One of these MICS approaches is the J-shaped upper ministernotomy which results in favourable long-term outcomes even in elderly and redo patients when compared with conventional sternotomy. Owing to its similarity to a full midline sternotomy, it has become the most popular MICS approach besides a mini-thoracotomy. It is a safe and feasible access, but certain recognized principles are mandatory to minimize complications. After identification of the landmarks, the 5-cm skin incision is performed in the midline between the second and fourth rib. The third or fourth right intercostal space is located and dissected laterally off the sternum. After osteotomy, the pericardium is pulled up with stay sutures which allow excellent exposure. The surgical procedures are performed in a standard fashion with central cannulation. Continuous CO2 insufflation is used to minimize the risk of air embolism. Epicardial pacing wires are placed before the removal of the aortic cross-clamp and one chest tube is used. Sternal closure is achieved with three to five stainless steel wires. The pectoral muscle, subcutaneous tissue and skin are adapted with resorbable running sutures. When performed properly, complications are rare (conversion, bleeding and wound infection) and well manageable.

Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement

With the advent of transcatheter aortic valve replacement and the emergence of rapid deployment aortic valves, there is a resurgent interest in minimizing the trauma of surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR). The present review summarizes the history of minimal access AVR and attempts to collate the existing evidence regarding minimal access AVR.

Concurrent Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement and Coronary Artery Bypass via Limited Right Anterior Thoracotomy

An 89-year-old man and an 80-year-old woman were treated surgically for critical aortic stenosis secondary to senile calcific aortic disease and high-grade calcified lesions in the ostium of the right coronary artery. Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement and concurrent coronary artery bypass grafting were performed concurrently through a 5-cm right anterior thoracotomy in the second intercostal space. Surgery was uncomplicated in both cases, with no adverse events. Both patients were alive and well at midterm follow-up. Concurrent minimally invasive aortic valve replacement and coronary artery bypass grafting can be performed successfully through a limited right anterior thoracotomy.