Mini-aortic valve replacements are not associated with an increased incidence of patient–prosthesis mismatch: a propensity-scored analysis

Aortic Valve Replacement: Is Minimally Invasive Really Better? A Contemporary Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

In recent years, minimally invasive cardiac surgery has increased in prevalence. There has been significant debate regarding the optimal approach to isolated aortic valve replacement between conventional midline sternotomy and minimally invasive approaches. We performed a systematic review of the contemporary literature comparing minimally invasive to full sternotomy aortic valve replacement. PubMed and Embase were systematically searched for articles published from 2010-2021. A total of 1215 studies were screened and 45 studies (148,606 patients total) met the inclusion criteria. This study found rates of in-hospital mortality were higher with full sternotomy than ministernotomy ( P = 0.02). 30-day mortality was higher with full sternotomy compared to right anterior thoracotomy ( P = 0.006). Renal complications were more common with full sternotomy versus ministernotomy ( P < 0.00001) and right anterior thoracotomy ( P < 0.0001). Rates of wound infections were greater with full sternotomy than ministernotomy ( P = 0.02) and right anterior thoracotomy ( P < 0.00001). Intensive care unit length of stay ( P = 0.0001) and hospital length of stay ( P < 0.0001) were shorter with ministernotomy compared to full sternotomy. This review found that minimally invasive approaches to isolated aortic valve replacement result in reduced early mortality and select measures of postoperative morbidity; however, long-term mortality is not significantly different based on surgical approach. An analysis of mortality alone is not sufficient for the selection of the optimal approach to isolated aortic valve replacement. Surgeon experience, individual patient characteristics, and preference require thorough consideration, and additional studies investigating quality of life measures will be imperative in identifying the optimal approach to isolated aortic valve replacement.

A case of right ventricular outflow tract obstruction after minimally invasive aortic valve replacement

Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement is commonly used to treat aortic valve disease through smaller incisions and upper hemisternotomy. No major differences in postoperative outcomes have been reported compared with full sternotomy aortic valve replacement. In this case report, we present a rare complication of right ventricular outflow tract obstruction after minimally invasive aortic valve replacement.

Stonehenge technique is associated with faster aortic clamp time in group of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement via right infra-axillary thoracotomy

BACKGROUND

Trans-right axillary aortic valve replacement (TAX-AVR) remains uncommon. We developed a special method to pull the heart closer to the right chest wall to make the surgery as easy and safe as aortic valve replacement via median sternotomy. Because the retraction sutures lifting the ascending aorta and aortic root are arranged circularly around the wound, we named this technique "Stonehenge technique".

METHODS

We examined 47 patients who underwent aortic valve replacement through a small right infra-axillary thoracotomy as the initial surgical therapy. These patients were divided into two groups: the conventional TAX-AVR group that underwent AVR via the conventional small right axillary incision approach (n = 20) and the TAX-AVR with SH group that underwent AVR with the Stonehenge technique (n = 27).

RESULTS

The aortic cross-clamp and the extracorporeal circulation time were significantly shorter in the TAX-AVR with SH group than in the conventional TAX-AVR group (conventional TAX-AVR group: 125.5 ± 47.9; TAX-AVR with SH group: 96.0 ± 14.0, p = 0.004, and conventional TAX-AVR group: 163.8 ± 55.9; TAX-AVR with SH group: 140.0 ± 16.8, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

The outcomes of this technique depend on the site of the retraction sutures in the opened pericardium, direction of pull, amount of force applied, and precautions taken. If performed correctly, the ascending aorta and the root can be pulled from the wound to within the surgeon's fingers' reach, thereby reducing aortic cross-clamp and extracorporeal circulation times in group of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement via right infra-axillary thoracotomy.