Outcomes of minimally invasive valve surgery versus median sternotomy in patients age 75 years or greater

Outcomes of minimally invasive isolated tricuspid valve repair and replacement through right mini-thoracotomy

Objective

Isolated tricuspid valve surgery is uncommon and associated with high perioperative morbidity and mortality. We aimed to study the overall outcomes of patients who underwent minimally invasive right thoracotomy tricuspid valve surgery (Mini-TVS), consisting of either tricuspid valve repair (TVre) or replacement (TVR).

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of all Mini-TVS procedures (2017-2022), through which we identified isolated tricuspid valve surgeries. We examined in-hospital outcomes, survival analysis over a 4-year period, and competing risk analysis for reoperative surgery.

Results

Among a total of 51 patients, the average age was 60 ± 16 years, and 67% (n = 34) were female. Severe tricuspid regurgitation was present in all cases. Infective endocarditis was noted in 7.8% (n = 4), and 24% (n = 12) had preexisting pacemakers. Mini-TVS included TVre in 18 patients (35%) and TVR in 33 patients (65%). The in-hospital and 30-day mortality rates were 4% (n = 2) and 6% (n = 3), respectively. At 4 years, the overall TVS survival was 76% (confidence interval, 62-93%), with no significant difference between TVre and TVR (91% vs 69%, P = .16). At follow-up, 3 patients required repeat surgery for recurrent regurgitation after 2.6, 3.3, and 11 months, with a reoperation rate of 7.3% (confidence interval, 2.4-22%) at 2 years. Factors associated with worse overall survival included nonelective surgery, right ventricular dysfunction, serum creatinine >2 g/dL, and concomitant left-sided valve disease.

Conclusions

A nonsternotomy minimally invasive approach is a feasible option for high-risk patients. Midterm outcomes were similar in repair or replacement. Patients with right ventricular dysfunction and left-sided disease had worse outcomes.

Hybrid approach in patients with aortic valve disease and concomitant coronary heart disease: retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

Aim: The aim of the study was to analyze the effectiveness of the hybrid approach, which involves the combination of aortic valve replacement (AVR) with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), in patients with CHD and aortic valve disease..

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Materials and Methods: For this study, analysis of medical records of adult patients (over 18 years old) who underwent AVR along with myocardial revascularization at the State Institution "Heart Institute Ministry of Health of Ukraine" in the period from 2018 to 2022 was carried out. Quality of life was assessed in 6 and 12 months after AVR with myocardial revascularization using Short Form 36 Survey (SF-36).

RESULTS

Results: We selected 130 patients who underwent AVR together with myocardial revascularization (first group (n=51) - a combination of AVR and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI); second group (n=79) - a combination of AVR and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The duration of cardiopulmonary bypass and aorta cross clamping in first group was recorded by 1.5 times and by 1.4 times significantly lower compared to the second group (p=0.0001). The pain index after 6 months according to the SF-36 questionnaire was found to be 13.5% (p=0.017) significantly higher in patients of the first group compared to the second group, while other indicators did not differ among groups.

CONCLUSION

Conclusions: Patients with the hybrid approach of treatment were characterized by a similar level of postoperative complications with the surgical group. At the same time, this cohort of patients had a better SF-36 pain index in 6 months after the hybrid intervention.

Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement: Case Series Study

Background

Degenerative aortic stenosis is a prevalent and severe condition necessitating aortic valve replacement (AVR) when the valve area critically narrows to 0.7 cm² or when symptoms are manifested. Traditional AVR via median sternotomy, poses considerable risks for patients with comorbidities or advanced age.

Objective

This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of mini sternotomy aortic valve replacement (MSAVR), a minimally invasive technique designed to reduce surgical trauma, improve postoperative recovery, and lower healthcare costs.

Methods

A reversed L-type upper partial sternotomy (RLUPS) approach was performed in five patients focusing on standardized surgical procedures, and rigorous postoperative care. Key findings indicate that MSAVR markedly reduces postoperative complications, ICU stay, and overall hospital stay compared to traditional sternotomy.

Results

The median postoperative length of stay was seven days for MSAVR versus 12 days for traditional sternotomy, with ICU stays of 52 hours and 119 hours, respectively. Our study also highlights the cost-effectiveness of MSAVR, with decreased hospital costs per patient due to reduced ICU resource utilization and shorter hospital stays. These findings suggest that MSAVR is a valuable and advantageous alternative to traditional sternotomy, offering substantial benefits in terms of patient outcomes and healthcare efficiency.

Conclusion

Our work underscores the potential of minimally invasive techniques in improving the management of severe degenerative aortic stenosis, marking a significant advancement in the field of cardiac surgery.

Single or Combined Valve Surgery and Concomitant Right Coronary Artery Bypass through Right Anterior Minithoracotomy Approach

BACKGROUND

Patients with combined valve and coronary artery disease are commonly performed by standard median sternotomy approach for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and valve surgery. The purpose of this study is to describe our experience and show feasibility and safety of minimally invasive approach to single or combined valve pathology with single-vessel right coronary artery (RCA) disease, even if it is suitable to percutaneous coronary intervention.

METHODS

This retrospective study comprised 28 consecutive patients who underwent single or combined valve surgery concomitant right CABG through right anterior minithoracotomy between February 2018 and December 2020. Preoperative evaluation, intraoperative, and postoperative outcomes were reviewed and analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 12 men and 16 women. The mean age was 71.46 ± 6.82 years. Ten patients were in New York Heart Association class III or IV. The mean cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross-clamping times were 117.6 ± 21.3 and 98.1 ± 22.6 minutes, respectively. The mean time to extubation was 9.7 ± 5.6 hours, the mean intensive care unit stay was 37.4 ± 14.6 hours, and the mean hospital stay was 6.9 ± 3.2 days. There was one patient who underwent reoperation for bleeding. There were no instances of postoperative stroke, myocardial infarction, renal failure, or wound infection. The mean follow-up was 19 ± 2.4 months.

CONCLUSION

Presence of RCA lesion is not a contraindication for minimally invasive approach in cases who underwent single or combined valve surgery. Combined valve surgery and right CABG via right anterior minithoracotomy are a safe and feasible option to standard median sternotomy surgery, even if RCA lesions seem suitable for stenting.

Endoscopic Aortic Valve Replacement: Initial Outcomes of Isolated and Concomitant Surgery

BACKGROUND

The applicability of totally endoscopic surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) in multivalve operations is unknown. This study describes an approach and perioperative outcomes of totally endoscopic isolated and concomitant AVR using various valve types.

METHODS

A total of 216 patients (114 male; mean age, 71.3 ± 11.3 years) underwent totally endoscopic AVR from May 2017 to October 2022 in a tertiary care center. The 3-port technique was used: a 3- to 4-cm main port without rib spreading, a 10-mm 3-dimensional endoscopic port, and a 5-mm left-hand port with femoral cannulations. Sutures were hand tied with a knot pusher. Descriptive analyses compared perioperative outcomes between patients with or without concomitant procedures.

RESULTS

Of 216 patients, concomitant surgery was performed in 33 (15.2%) patients. Of the 33, 21 (63.6%) had a concomitant mitral procedure. A stented bioprosthesis was implanted in 165 (76.3%) patients, a mechanical valve in 22 (10.2%) patients, and a rapid deployment or sutureless valve in 29 (13.4%) patients. Median operation time and aortic cross-clamp time were 175 minutes (interquartile range; 150-194 minutes) and 78 minutes (interquartile range; 67-92 minutes) for isolated AVR, respectively. Thirty-day mortality occurred in 1 patient (0.5%). Two patients (0.9%) had conversion to sternotomy. Major neurologic events occurred in 3 patients (1.4%). The major adverse event rate was similar between patients with or without concomitant procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic AVR can safely address concomitant valve diseases.

Is It Reasonable to Perform Isolated SAVR by Residents in the TAVI Era?

BACKGROUND

The role of conventional surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is increasingly questioned since the indication for transcatheter aortic valve implantations (TAVIs) is currently extended. While the number of patients referred to SAVR decreases, it is unclear if SAVR should be performed by junior resident surgeons in the course of a heart surgeons training.

METHODS

Patients with isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR) were analyzed with respect to the surgeon's qualification. AVR performed by resident surgeons was compared with AVR by senior surgeons. The collective was analyzed with respect to clinical short-term outcomes comparing full sternotomy (FS) with minimally invasive surgery and ministernotomy (MS) with right anterior thoracotomy (RAT) after a 1:1 propensity score matching.

RESULTS

The 30-day all-cause mortality was 2.3 and 3.4% for resident versus senior AVR groups, cerebrovascular event rates were 1.1 versus 2.6%, and no cases of significant paravalvular leak were detected. Clinical short-term outcomes between FS and minimally invasive access, as well after MS and RAT were comparable.

CONCLUSION

Our current data show feasibility and safety of conventional SAVR procedure performed by resident surgeons in the era of TAVI. Minimally invasive surgery should be trained and performed in higher volumes early in the educational process as it is a safe treatment option.

Minimally Invasive Valvular Surgery in the Elderly - Safety, Early Recovery, and Long-Term Outcomes

BACKGROUND

For elderly people, the benefit of minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) is unclear, so we evaluated the safety, recovery, and long-term survival in elderly MICS patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

63 propensity score-matched pairs of 213 consecutive patients (≥70 years old) who underwent mitral and/or tricuspid valve surgery between 2010 and 2020 (121 right mini-thoracotomies vs. 92 full sternotomies) were compared. The primary outcome was safety (composite endpoint of in-hospital death or major complication). Secondary outcomes were early ambulation and discharge to home. There were no differences between the groups for in-hospital death (3.2% vs. 0.0%, P=0.157) and primary outcome (14.3% vs. 17.5%, P=0.617). The rate of early ambulation (73.0% vs. 55.6%, P=0.048) and discharge to home (66.7% vs. 49.2%, P=0.034) were significantly higher in the mini-thoracotomy group. Major complication was an independent negative predictor of early ambulation for mini-thoracotomy but not for a conservative approach. Survival was 87.8±4.4% vs. 86.8±4.7% at 5 years, which was not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

Similar safety but better recovery were observed for mini-thoracotomy, and long-term survival was comparable between groups. Major complication was a negative predictor of early ambulation after mini-thoracotomy. Careful preoperative risk stratification would enhance the benefits of MICS in elderly patients.

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery after failed transcatheter mitral valve repair in an intermediate-risk cohort

OBJECTIVES

Although clinical experience with transcatheter mitral valve interventions is rapidly increasing, there is still a lack of evidence regarding surgical treatment options for the management of recurrent mitral regurgitation (MR). This study provides guidance for a minimally invasive surgical approach following failed transcatheter mitral valve repair, which is based on the underlying mitral valve (MV) pathology and the type of intervention.

METHODS

A total of 46 patients who underwent minimally invasive MV surgery due to recurrent or residual MR after transcatheter edge-to-edge repair or direct interventional annuloplasty between October 2014 and March 2021 were included.

RESULTS

The median age of the patients was 78 [interquartile range, 71-82] years and the EuroSCORE II was 4.41 [interquartile range, 2.66-6.55]. At the index procedure, edge-to-edge repair had been performed in 45 (97.8%) patients and direct annuloplasty in 1 patient. All patients with functional MR at the index procedure (n = 36) underwent MV replacement. Of the patients with degenerative MR (n = 10), 5 patients were eligible for MV repair after removal of the MitraClip. The 1-year survival following surgical treatment was 81.3% and 75.0% in patients with functional and degenerative MR, respectively. No residual MR greater than mild during follow-up was observed in patients who underwent MV repair.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive surgery following failed transcatheter mitral valve repair is feasible and safe, with promising midterm survival. The surgical management should be tailored to the underlying valve pathology at the index procedure, the extent of damage of the MV leaflets and the type of previous intervention.

Percutaneous versus surgical femoral access in minimally invasive cardiac operations

OBJECTIVES

Both surgical and percutaneous femoral accesses for the establishment of extracorporeal circulation are used in minimally invasive cardiac surgeries. The goal of this study was to compare the outcomes with the MANTA vascular closure device after percutaneous arterial decannulation via the surgical approach.

METHODS

Between November 2018 and January 2021, a total of 490 consecutive patients underwent minimally invasive cardiac operations at our institution. Cannulation and decannulation of femoral vessels were under direct vision surgically or percutaneously. The MANTA system was used to close the femoral artery in all patients with percutaneous cannulation. Demographic, clinical and procedural data were collected retrospectively.

RESULTS

Surgical cut-down and suture closure of the femoral artery was performed in 222 patients (45.3%); percutaneous access and closure with the MANTA system was used in 268 patients (54.7%). The surgical group presented a significantly higher incidence of any access site complication compared to the percutaneous group [18 patients (8.1%) vs 6 patients (2.2%); P = 0.003]. Lymph fistula and wound healing disorders occurred more frequently in the surgical group (3.2% vs 0% [P = 0.004] and 3.6% vs 0% [P = 0.002], respectively). Median procedural duration and stays in the intensive care unit were significantly lower in the percutaneous group {127 [interquartile range (IQR) 97-158] min vs 150 (IQR 117-185) min (P < 0.001) and 1 (IQR 1-2) day vs 2 (IQR 1-3) days (P = 0.008), respectively}.

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous access and closure with the MANTA system are feasible, safe and associated with lower incidences of all-cause access site complications and shorter stays in the intensive care unit compared to surgical access and closure in minimally invasive cardiac surgeries.

Incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing minimally invasive versus median sternotomy valve surgery: propensity score matching

Objective

Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) are common incidents associated with an increased hospital stay, readmissions into the intensive care unit (ICU), increased costs, and mortality after cardiac surgery. Our study aims to analyze whether minimally invasive valve surgery (MIVS) can reduce the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications compared to the full median sternotomy (FS) approach.

Methods

We reviewed the records of 1076 patients who underwent isolated mitral or aortic valve surgery (80 MIVS and 996 FS) in our institution between January 2015 and December 2019. Propensity score-matching analysis was used to compare outcomes between the groups and to reduce selection bias.

Results

Propensity score matching revealed no significant difference in hospital mortality between the groups. The incidence of PPCs was significantly less in the MIVS group than in the FS group (19% vs. 69%, respectively; P < 0.0001). The most common PPCs were atelectasis (P = 0.034), pleural effusions (P = 0.042), and pulmonary infection (P = 0.001). Prolonged mechanical ventilation time (> 24 h) (P = 0.016), blood transfusion amount (P = 0.006), length of hospital stay (P < 0.0001), and ICU stay (P < 0.0001) were significantly less in the MIVS group. Cardiopulmonary bypass (CBP), aortic cross-clamping, and operative time intervals were significantly longer in the MIVS group than in the matched FS group (P < 0.001). A multivariable analysis revealed a decreased risk of PPCs in patients undergoing MIVS (odds ratio, 0.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.006–0.180; P < 0.0001).

Conclusion

MIVS for isolated valve surgery reduces the risk of PPCs compared with the FS approach.

Step-by-Step Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement: the RAT Approach

In the growing era of transcatheter aortic valve implantation, it is crucial to develop minimally invasive surgical techniques. These methods enable easier recovery from surgical trauma, especially in elderly and frail patients. Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MIAVR) is frequently performed via upper hemisternotomy. We describe MIAVR via right anterior thoracotomy, which is associated with less trauma, rapid mobilization, lower blood transfusion rates, and lower risk of postoperative wound infections. As minimally invasive procedures tend to take longer operative times, we suggest using rapid-deployment valve prostheses to overcome this limitation. This description focuses on the technical aspects and preoperative assessment.

Minimally invasive versus conventional sternotomy for Mitral valve repair: protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial (UK Mini Mitral)

INTRODUCTION

Numbers of patients undergoing mitral valve repair (MVr) surgery for severe mitral regurgitation have grown and will continue to rise. MVr is routinely performed via median sternotomy; however, there is a move towards less invasive surgical approaches.There is debate within the clinical and National Health Service (NHS) commissioning community about widespread adoption of minimally invasive MVr surgery in the absence of robust research evidence; implementation requires investment in staff and infrastructure.The UK Mini Mitral trial will provide definitive evidence comparing patient, NHS and clinical outcomes in adult patients undergoing MVr surgery. It will establish the best surgical approach for MVr, setting a standard against which emerging percutaneous techniques can be measured. Findings will inform optimisation of cost-effective practice.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

UK Mini Mitral is a multicentre, expertise based randomised controlled trial of minimally invasive thoracoscopically guided right minithoracotomy versus conventional sternotomy for MVr. The trial is taking place in NHS cardiothoracic centres in the UK with established minimally invasive mitral valve surgery programmes. In each centre, consenting and eligible patients are randomised to receive surgery performed by consultant surgeons who meet protocol-defined surgical expertise criteria. Patients are followed for 1 year, and consent to longer term follow-up.Primary outcome is physical functioning 12 weeks following surgery, measured by change in Short Form Health Survey (SF-36v2) physical functioning scale. Early and 1 year echo data will be reported by a core laboratory. Estimates of key clinical and health economic outcomes will be reported up to 5 years.The primary economic outcome is cost effectiveness, measured as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained over 52 weeks following index surgery.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

A favourable opinion was given by Wales REC 6 (16/WA/0156). Trial findings will be disseminated to patients, clinicians, commissioning groups and through peer reviewed publication.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN13930454.

Minimally Invasive Versus Sternotomy for Mitral Surgery in the Elderly: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

The safety of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) in elderly patients is still debated. Our objective was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing MIMVS with conventional sternotomy (CS) in elderly patients (≥65 years old).

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for trials and observational studies comparing MIMVS with CS in patients ≥65 years old presenting for mitral valve surgery. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis of all outcomes.

Results

The MIMVS group had lower odds of acute renal failure (odds ratio [OR] 0.27; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.78), prolonged intubation (>48 h; OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.70), less blood product transfusion (weighted mean difference [WMD] −0.82 units; 95% CI −1.29 to −0.34 units), shorter ICU length of stay (LOS; WMD −2.57 days; 95% CI −3.24 to −1.90 days) and hospital LOS (WMD −4.06 days; 95% CI −5.19 to −2.94 days). There were no significant differences in the odds of mortality, stroke, respiratory infection, reoperation for bleeding, and postoperative atrial fibrillation. MIMVS was associated with longer cross-clamp (WMD 11.8 min; 95% CI 3.5 to 20.1 min) and cardiopulmonary bypass times (WMD 23.0 min; 95% CI 10.4 to 35.6 min).

Conclusions

MIMVS in elderly patients is associated with lower postoperative complications, blood transfusion, shorter ICU, and hospital LOS, and longer cross-clamp and bypass times.

Minimally invasive resection of benign cardiac tumors

Primary cardiac tumours for which surgical resection is the main stay of treatment are rare and present both diagnostic and management challenges. The majority of patients are asymptomatic and one third of those who have symptoms present with vague constitutional symptoms which further complicates the process of early diagnosis. The current state-of-the art multi-modality imaging, routine use of intra-operative transoesophageal echocardiogram (TOE) in most cardiac centres and the tremendous advances of endoscopic adjuncts greatly enhances both the diagnosis and management of those group of patients. The surgical burden of median sternotomy and the contemporary trend towards less invasive surgery urged the necessity for adopting minimally invasive surgery in general and cardiac tumours are no exception. Despite the rarity of theses tumours, minimally invasive resection is successful in the hands of experienced minimally invasive surgeons who employ the same minimal access valve surgery platform to access the tumours in various cardiac chambers and valves with no compromise to the oncological clearance and hence achieve the benefits of minimally invasive surgery without compromising long term outcomes.

Minimally invasive aortic valve surgery

Since their introduction, it has been demonstrated that minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MIAVR) approaches are safe and effective for the treatment of aortic valve diseases. To date, the main advantage of these approaches is represented by the reduced surgical trauma, with a subsequent reduced complication rate and faster recovery. This makes such approaches an appealing choice also for frail patients [obese, aged, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)]. The standardization of the minimally invasive techniques, together with the implementation of preoperative workup and anesthesiological intra- and post-operative care, led to an amelioration of surgical results and reduction of surgical times. Moreover, the improvement of surgical technology and the introduction of new devices such as sutureless and rapid deployment (SURD) valves, has helped the achievement of comparable results to traditional surgery. However, transcatheter technologies are nowadays more and more important in the treatment of aortic valve disease, also in low risk patients. For this reason surgeons should put new efforts for further reducing the surgical trauma in the future, even taking inspiration from other disciplines. In this review, we aim to present a review of literature evidences regarding minimally invasive treatment of aortic diseases, also reflecting our personal experience with MIAVR techniques. This review could represent a tool for a well-structured patient assessment and preoperative planning, in order to safely carrying out an MIAVR procedure with satisfactory outcomes.

Minimally invasive mitral valve repair

Minimally invasive mitral valve (MV) repair is being increasingly performed over the last 2 decades due to the constantly growing patient demand, since it offers a shorter recovery, less restriction and faster return to normal physical activities, reduction in pain, and superior cosmetic results. However, such procedures have to be performed through small incisions which limit visualization and the freedom of movement of the surgeon, in contrast to conventional operations that are performed through a sternotomy. Therefore, special long surgical instruments are required, and visualization is usually enhanced with advanced port-access two-dimensional (2D) or three-dimensional (3D) thoracoscopic cameras. This makes performance of a minimally invasive MV repair more challenging for the surgeon and is thereby associated with a steep learning curve. Nonetheless, the vast majority of patients who require MV repair are usually good candidates for this less invasive technique, though adequate patient selection is of utmost importance for success. Concomitant cardiac procedures such as ablation surgery for atrial fibrillation or right-sided interventions such as tricuspid valve surgery, heart tumor resection, and atrial septal defect closure can easily be performed using this approach. Short- and long-term results after minimally invasive MV repair are excellent and comparable with those achieved through a sternotomy approach. There are few drawbacks associated with minimally invasive MV repair such as the high technical demands of working through a constrained space and development of complications associated with peripheral cannulation and seldom unilateral pulmonary edema. Nonetheless, high-volume centers have been able to achieve similar operating times, postoperative complication rates, and mid-/long-term outcomes to those obtained through conventional sternotomy. Up-to-date evidence is needed in order to improve recommendations supporting minimally invasive MV repair. Future innovations should concentrate on decreasing complexity and improving reproducibility of minimally invasive procedures in low-volume centers.

Is it safe to move away from a full sternotomy for aortic valve replacement?

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgical approaches have gained popularity among patients and surgeons. The aim of this project was to assess the safety of initiating aortic valve replacement via an anterior right thoracotomy program.

METHODS

Between May 2015 and May 2019, data of all isolated primary aortic valve replacements were extracted retrospectively from our prospectively collected database and categorized into conventional median sternotomy, hemisternotomy, and anterior right thoracotomy cases. In total, 661 patients underwent isolated primary aortic valve replacement, of whom 429 (65%) had a median sternotomy, 126 (19%) had a hemisternotomy, and 106 (16%) had an anterior right thoracotomy. Preoperative characteristics were similar in each of the three groups. Statistical testing of the surgical groups was undertaken using the chi-square test for categorical variables and one-way analysis of variance with Tukey post-hoc pairwise tests (where appropriate) for continuous variables, to identify differences between pairs of data.

RESULTS

Cardiopulmonary bypass and crossclamp times were significantly longer in the anterior right thoracotomy group compared to the hemisternotomy and median sternotomy groups (p < 0.001). Blood loss was significantly less and hospital stay significantly shorter in the hemisternotomy group compared to median sternotomy group but not the anterior right thoracotomy group. Mortality, stroke, renal, gastrointestinal and respiratory complications showed no statistical differences.

CONCLUSION

Surgical aortic valve replacement had a very low mortality and morbidity in our experience, and it is safe to start a minimal access program for aortic valve replacement.

Minimally invasive surgical aortic valve replacement: The RALT approach

Less-invasive techniques for cardiothoracic surgical procedures are designed to limit surgical trauma, but the technical requirements and preoperative planning are more demanding than those for conventional sternotomy. Patient selection, interdisciplinary collaboration, and surgical skills are key factors for procedural success. Aortic valve replacement is frequently performed through an upper hemisternotomy, but the right anterior minithoracotomy represents an even less traumatic, technical advancement. Preoperative assessment of the ascending aorta in relation to the sternum is mandatory to select patients and the intercostal access site. This description of the surgical technique focuses on the specific procedural details including the obligatory planning with computed tomography and our cannulation strategy. We also sought to define the anatomical ascending aorta-sternal relationship, as it is of utmost importance in preoperative computed tomographic planning.

Cannulation Strategies for Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery

OBJECTIVE

Operative techniques for minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) have evolved dramatically over the past decade to include a wide demographic of patients. Mastering a variety of cannulation techniques is of paramount importance in performing a safe perfusion strategy and operation. Our aim is to describe cannulation strategies utilized in various MICS procedures.

METHODS

We review numerous cannulation strategies and their application in different minimally invasive procedures.

RESULTS

Cannulation strategies will vary depending on the MICS procedure and other anatomical variations and obstacles. Utilizing the appropriate cannulation strategy will allow for a safe and effective operation.

CONCLUSIONS

Mastering the art of cannulation will provide surgeons with a toolbox to choose from when performing MICS in a wide variety of procedures.

Rapid deployment aortic valve replacement through anterior right thoracotomy: Clinical outcomes and haemodynamic performance

BACKGROUND

The ease of implantation of the rapid deployment (RD) and sutureless valves has contributed to the adoption of anterior right thoracotomy (ART) approach for aortic valve replacement (AVR).

AIM OF THE STUDY

This study evaluates the safety and haemodynamic performance of minimally invasive AVR through ART using the RD valves.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, single-center review of a total of 50 consecutive patients who received RD-AVR through ART.

RESULTS

The median age of patients was 75 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 69-80), and median Euroscore II was 5.1 (IQR: 2.4-7.5). ART RD-AVR was successfully performed in all cases with no conversion to sternotomy, paravalvular leaks or need for valve explantation. The mean size of the implanted valve was 23.2  ± 2.3 mm. In-hospital mortality was 2%. The mean and maximum pressure gradients across the aortic prosthesis were 10 mm Hg (IQR: 9-12) and 19 mm Hg (IQR: 16-23).

CONCLUSIONS

Rapid deployment aortic valve replacement can be safely performed through anterior right thoracotomy wit excellent haemodynamic performance and low postoperative complications rate.

Does minimal invasive cardiac surgery reduce the incidence of post-operative atrial fibrillation?

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common post-operative complication and tends to be the most common arrhythmia after cardiac surgery. The etiology and risk factors for post-operative AF are poorly understood, but older age, large left atrium, diffuse coronary artery disease, a history of AF paroxysms and in general, pre-existing cardiac conditions that cause restricting and susceptibility towards inflammation have been consistently linked with post-operative atrial fibrillation (POAF). It has been traditionally thought that post-operative AF is transient, well-tolerated, benign to the patient and self-limiting complication of cardiac surgery that was temporary and easily treated. However, recent evidence suggests that POAF may be more "malignant" than previously thought, associated with follow-up mortality and morbidity. Several minimally invasive approaches, including the right parasternal approach, upper and lower mini-sternotomy (MS), V-shaped, Z-shaped, inverse-T, J-, reverse-C and reverse-L partial MS, transverse sternotomy and right mini-thoracotomy, have been developed for cardiac surgery operations since 1993 and have been associated with better outcomes and lower perioperative morbidity compared to full sternotomy (FS). The common goal of several minimally invasive approaches is to reduce invasiveness and surgical trauma. According to a statement from the American Heart Association (AHA), the term "minimally invasive" refers to a small chest wall incision that does not include a FS. This review is aimed to evaluate the use of minimally invasive techniques like mini-sternotomy, mini-thoracotomy and hybrid techniques versus conventional techniques which are used in cardiac surgery and to compare the frequency of post-operative AF and its effect on post-operative complications, morbidity and mortality, after cardiac surgery operations with FS versus cardiac surgery operations with the use of minimally invasive techniques.

Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement with Sutureless Valves: Results From an International Prospective Registry

Objective

To report the early and mid-term results of patients who underwent minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MI-AVR) with a sutureless prosthesis from an international prospective registry.

Methods

Between March 2011 and September 2018, among 957 patients included in the prospective observational SURE-AVR (Sorin Universal REgistry on Aortic Valve Replacement) registry, 480 patients underwent MI-AVR with self-expandable Perceval aortic bioprosthesis (LivaNova PLC, London, UK) in 29 international institutions through either minithoracotomy ( n = 266) or ministernotomy ( n = 214). Postoperative, follow-up, and echocardiographic outcomes were analyzed for all patients.

Results

Patient age was 76.1 ± 7.1 years; 64.4% were female. Median EuroSCORE I was 7.9% (interquartile range [IQR], 4.8 to 10.9). Median cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times were 81 minutes (IQR 64 to 100) and 51 minutes (IQR 40 to 63). First successful implantation was achieved in 97.9% of cases. Two in-hospital deaths occurred, 1 for noncardiovascular causes and 1 following a disabling stroke. In the early (≤30 days) period, stroke rate was 1.4%. Three early explants were reported: 2 due to nonstructural valve dysfunction (NSVD) and 1 for malpositioning. One mild and 1 moderate paravalvular leak were reported. In 16 patients (3.3%) pacemaker implantation was needed. Mean follow-up was 2.4 years (maximum = 7 years). During follow-up 5 explants were reported, 3 due to endocarditis and 2 due to NSVD. Follow-up stroke rate was 2.5%. Three structural valve deteriorations not requiring reintervention were reported. Five-year survival was 91.45%.

Conclusions

In this large prospective international registry, MI-AVR with Perceval valve confirmed to be safe, reproducible, and effective in an intermediate-risk population, providing excellent clinical recovery both in early and mid-term follow-up.

[Right thoracotomy approach for minimally invasive mitral valve surgery]

Minimally invasive approach in mitral valve surgery has been applied since the late 1990s. Considerable experience of mini-thoracotomy in cardiac surgery has been gained over this period. Stages of the development of minimally invasive cardiac surgery are reviewed in the article. Features of mitral valve surgery through right-sided mini-thoracotomy are discussed. Surgical outcomes of these procedures are reported considering data of various cardiac surgery centers. Moreover, the authors determined indications and limitations of this technique.

Aortic Valve Replacement and Concomitant Right Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Performed via a Right Minithoracotomy Approach

Objective

We present our experience of concomitant right coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and aortic valve replacement performed via a right minithoracotomy in patients with coronary lesions not amenable to percutaneous intervention.

Methods

A total of 17 patients underwent concomitant aortic valve replacement and right CABG between April 2008 and July 2013.A5-to 6-cm minithoracotomy incision was made over the right second or third intercostal space, and the costochondral cartilage was transected. A saphenous vein bypass to the right coronary artery was then performed, initiating the anastomosis from the toe of the graft. Subsequently, the aortic valve was replaced using standard techniques.

Results

There were 6 men and 11 women. The median European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II score mortality risk was 5% [interquartile range (IQR), 2%-8%]. The mean (SD) age was 77 (10) years, the left ventricular ejection fraction was 59% (8%), and the New York Heart Association functional class was 2.4 (0.8). One patient had a history of CABG. The mean (SD) cardiopulmonary bypass time was 168 (57) minutes, and the aortic cross-clamp time was 133 (36) minutes. Three patients underwent concomitant mitral valve surgery (replacement, 2; repair, 1). The median intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay were 47 hours (IQR, 24–90) and 9 days (IQR, 5–13), respectively. There was one reoperation for bleeding, and there was one postoperative stroke. All patients were alive at a mean (SD) follow-up of 2 (1.1) years.

Conclusions

Aortic valve replacement with concomitant CABG performed via a right minithoracotomy approach is feasible.

Concomitant Annular Enlargement in Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement

OBJECTIVE

Aortic root enlargement may be necessary to implant adequately sized valves to avoid patient-prosthetic mismatch. Our objective was to assess the feasibility of annular enlargement during aortic valve replacement via a right anterior minithoracotomy.

METHODS

Twelve consecutive patients undergoing elective minimally invasive aortic valve replacement requiring annular enlargement over a 2-year period were retrospectively reviewed. A right anterior minithoracotomy was performed in all patients. Cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic crossclamp times, hospital length of stay, postoperative complications, rate of reoperation, echocardiographic data, and mortality were analyzed.

RESULTS

Mean age was 66 years ± 14. Mean body mass index was 34 ± 7.8 kg/m². All patients had normal preoperative ejection fractions. Indications for aortic valve replacement were severe (3/12, 25%) or critical (9/12, 75%) aortic stenosis due to degenerative aortic valve disease (10/12, 83%) and congenitally bicuspid aortic valve (2/12, 17%). Cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic crossclamp times were 144.7 ± 14.7 minutes and 111.7 ± 10.6 minutes, respectively. The median postoperative length of stay was 4 days. Peak and mean aortic valve gradients on postreplacement intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography were 14.5 ± 9.4 mmHg and 7.2 ± 4.2 mmHg, respectively, with no perivalvular leak on intraoperative or follow-up transthoracic echocardiogram. Postoperative transthoracic echocardiography had peak and mean aortic valve gradients of 12.1 ± 6.9 mmHg and 6.3 ± 3.7 mmHg, respectively. There were no postoperative mortalities. Freedom from reoperation was 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Annular enlargement performed during minimally invasive aortic valve replacement is feasible. Basic minimally invasive skills are recommended prior to instituting these more advanced techniques.

Minimally invasive surgical aortic valve replacement

Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MIAVR) is defined as a surgical aortic valve replacement which involves smaller chest incisions as opposed to full sternotomy. It is performed using cardiopulmonary bypass with cardiac arrest. It benefits from potential advantages of a less invasive procedure. To date, over 14 000 MIAVR have been reported in the literature. Due to heterogeneity of the studies, different surgical techniques and mainly the non-randomised nature of these studies comparing MIAVR with conventional aortic valve replacement, it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions. The two main techniques of MIAVR are mini-sternotomy and right anterior mini-thoracotomy. Both techniques with other less common forms of MIAVR will be discussed in this review. The advantages, disadvantages and surgical pitfalls will be discussed. Some of the advantages include shorter intensive care and hospital stay, reduced perioperative blood loss, less pain, improved respiratory function and cosmesis. The possible disadvantage of longer bypass and cross-clamp times may be counter balanced by the recent sutureless and rapid deployment valves. Despite some of the benefits, MIAVR has not been adopted by a significant proportion of the surgeons possibly related to the learning curve and requirements for re-training. As MIAVR becomes more common, randomised trials comparing this technique with transcatheter aortic valve implantation is warranted. In addition, assessing quality of life including return to work and functional capacity is needed.

Surgical treatment of elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis in the modern era - review

Surgical treatment of severe aortic stenosis offers good early and long-term results, even in elderly patients. Despite the implementation of percutaneous methods for the very high-risk group, surgical valve replacement remains the gold standard. The advanced age of patients should not be the only indicator limiting the possibility of surgery. In this review we present the most important information on the results of aortic stenosis surgical treatment in the groups of older patients. New methods such as percutaneous and minimally invasive methods of surgery are also discussed. Additionally, the presented information is referred to current guidelines for the treatment of severe aortic stenosis.

Full Sternotomy, Hemisternotomy, and Minithoracotomy for Aortic Valve Surgery: Is There a Difference?

BACKGROUND

This study compared perioperative results and mortality rates of different approaches to perform aortic valve replacement (AVR), describing predictors favoring one approach over the others.

METHODS

All patients who underwent AVR were enrolled. The choice of the approach was left to surgeon's preference. Data were retrospectively collected, and the major baseline characteristics (including age, sex, body mass index, creatinine clearance, preoperative condition, cardiovascular risk factors, functional status, and left ventricular ejection fraction, etc.) and intraoperative variables were recorded. To adjust for differences in baseline characteristics between the study groups, a propensity score matching was performed. Linear and logistic regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Partial upper hemisternotomy was performed in 820 patients (43%), right anterior minithoracotomy in 488 (26%), and median sternotomy in 599 (31%). After propensity score matching, three groups of 377 patients were obtained. Cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times were shorter in the right anterior minithoracotomy group than in the median sternotomy and partial upper hemisternotomy groups (p < 0.001). No significant differences in in-hospital mortality were observed (p = 0.9). Renal failure (odds ratio, 5.4; 95% confidence interval, 2.3 to 11.4; p < 0.0001), extracardiac arteriopathy (odds ratio, 2.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 6.7; p = 0.017), and left ventricular ejection fraction (odds ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.93 to 0.99; p = 0.009) emerged as independent predictors of in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimal-access isolated aortic valve surgery is a reproducible, safe, and effective procedure with similar outcomes and operating times compared with conventional sternotomy.

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery is associated with excellent resource utilization, cost, and outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (mini-MVR) has numerous associated benefits. However, many studies fail to include greater-risk patients. We hypothesized that a minimally invasive approach in a representative cohort provides excellent outcomes with reduced resource utilization.

METHODS

Mitral valve surgical records from 2011 to 2016 were paired with institutional financial records. Patients were stratified by approach and propensity-score matched to balance preoperative difference. The primary outcomes of interest were resource utilization including cost, discharge to a facility, and readmission.

RESULTS

A total of 478 patients underwent mitral surgery (21% mini-MVR) and were balanced after matching (n = 74 per group), with 18% of patients having nondegenerative mitral disease. Outcomes were excellent with similar rates of major morbidity (9.5% mini-MVR vs 10.8% conventional, P = .78). Mini-MVR cases had lower rates of transfusion (11% vs 27%, P = .01) and shorter ventilator times (3.7 vs 6.0 hours, P < .0001). Mean total hospital cost was equivalent ($49,703 vs $54,970, P = .235) with mini-MVR having lower ancillary ($1645 vs $2652, P = .001) and blood costs ($383 vs $1058, P = .001). These savings were offset by longer surgical times (291 vs 234 minutes, P < .0001) with greater surgical ($7645 vs $7293, P = .0001) and implant costs ($1148 vs $748, P = .03). Rates of discharge to a facility (9.6% vs 16.2%) and readmission (9.6% vs 4.1%) were not statistically different.

CONCLUSIONS

In a real-world cohort, mini-MVR continues to demonstrate excellent results with a favorable resource utilization profile. Greater surgical and implant costs with mini-MVR are offset by decreased transfusions and ancillary needs leading to equivalent overall hospital cost.

Novel Automated Suturing Technology for Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacements

PURPOSE

Annular suture placement during minimally invasive right anterior thoracotomy aortic valve replacements (MI-AVR) can be challenging. We present the early clinical experience with novel automated suturing technology that may reduce the technical difficulty of this operation.

DESCRIPTION

The technology presented involves an automated articulating suturing device that simultaneously drives dual-curved needles through the aortic annulus to place a pledgeted horizontal mattress suture remotely; a second device with 2 straight needles places suture through the sewing cuff of a prosthetic heart valve.

EVALUATION

Automated annular suturing was used in five MI-AVR procedures, which were successfully completed, with no paravalvular leaks detected and a mean aortic valve gradient of 6.4 mm Hg postprocedure. Mean aortic cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times were 100 and 134 minutes, respectively. All 5 patients were successfully discharged home, with a mean intensive care unit and total length of stay of 2 and 7 days, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Automated suturing during MI-AVRs is feasible and may reduce the technical challenge of this operation. Further research is necessary to determine its effect on patient outcomes.

[Surgical treatment of aortic valve stenosis]

Surgical aortic valve replacement still represents the gold standard in patients with severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis. In addition to conventional aortic valve replacement by mechanical or biological prostheses via a median sternotomy, novel approaches including minimally invasive strategies and new devices, such as so-called rapid deployment prostheses, are becoming increasingly more established. Autologous replacement strategies including the Ross and the Ozaki procedures have evolved into reliable options at selected centers of excellence. These novel treatment approaches in aortic valve surgery result in excellent short and long-term outcomes with a reduction of procedure-related complications. Taken together, these modern surgical replacement strategies enable a personalized surgical treatment in patients with aortic valve stenosis, which are tailored to the individual patient.

The economic value of rapid deployment aortic valve replacement via full sternotomy

Aim: To compare the economic value of EDWARDS INTUITY Elite™ (EIE) valve system for rapid-deployment aortic valve replacement (RDAVR) in a full sternotomy (FS) approach (EIE-FS-RDAVR) versus FS-AVR using conventional stented bioprosthesis. Data & methods: A simulation model to compare each treatment's 30-day inpatient utilization and complication rates utilized: clinical end points obtained from the TRANSFORM trial patient subset (EIE-FS-RDAVR) and a best evidence review of the published literature (FS-AVR); and costs from the Premier database and published literature. Results: EIE-FS-RDAVR costs $800 less than FS-AVR per surgery episode attributable to lowered complication rates and utilization. Combined with the lower mortality, EIE-FS-RDAVR was a superior (dominant) technology versus FS-AVR. Conclusion: This preliminary investigation of EIE-FS-RDAVR versus conventional FS-AVR found the EIE valve offered superior economic value over a 30-day period. Real-world analyses with additional long-term follow-up are needed to evaluate if this result can be replicated over a longer timeframe.

Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement in high risk patient groups

Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (AVR) aims to preserve the sternal integrity and improve postoperative outcomes. In low risk patients, this technique can be achieved with comparable mortality to the conventional approach and there is evidence of possible reduction in intensive care and hospital length of stay, transfusion requirement, renal dysfunction, improved respiratory function and increased patient satisfaction. In this review, we aim to asses if these benefits can be transferred to the high risk patient groups. We therefore, discuss the available evidence for the following high risk groups: elderly patients, re-operative surgery, poor lung function, pulmonary hypertension, obesity, concomitant procedures and high risk score cohorts.

Minimally invasive valve surgery in high-risk patients

The use of minimally, or less invasive, approaches to cardiac valve surgery has increased over the past decade. Because of its less traumatic nature, early studies in lower risk patients demonstrated the approach to be associated with an enhanced recovery, increased patient satisfaction, and good operative outcomes. With time, despite a steep learning curve, surgeons expanded this approach to perform more complex procedures, and include patients with more co-morbidity. The aim of this publication is to review the current literature involving the use of minimally invasive valve surgery (MIVS) in higher-risk patients.

Outcomes of minimally invasive double valve surgery

BACKGROUND

Double valve surgery is associated with an increased peri-operative morbidity and mortality. A less invasive right thoracotomy approach may be a viable alternative to median sternotomy surgery in these higher-risk patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the baseline demographics, operative characteristics, and post-operative outcomes of patients who underwent minimally invasive double valve surgery between January 2009 and December 2011 at our institution.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 117 patients, of which 68 (58.1%) were female. The mean age was 73±11 years, and the mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 52±11%. There were 43 (36.8%) patients with a history of congestive heart failure, 45 (38.5%) with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and 5 (4.3%) had a history of chronic kidney disease. The patients underwent primary (90.6%) or re-operative (9.4%) double valve surgery, which consisted of 50 (42.7%) aortic valve replacement and mitral valve repair, 31 (26.5%) mitral and tricuspid valve repair, 18 (15.4%) aortic and mitral valve replacement, 17 (14.5%) mitral valve replacement with tricuspid valve repair, and 1 (0.9%) aortic valve replacement with tricuspid valve repair. Post-operatively, there were 40 (34.2%) cases of prolonged ventilation, 9 (7.7%) acute kidney injury, 6 (5.1%) re-operations for bleeding, 1 (0.9%) cerebrovascular accident, and 15 (12.8%) cases of atrial fibrillation. The mean total hospital length of stay was 12±12 days, with an in-hospital mortality of 2 (1.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

A minimally invasive right thoracotomy approach to primary or re-operative double valve surgery is feasible, may be utilized with acceptable peri-operative morbidity and mortality.

Aortic Valve Surgery: Minimally Invasive Options

Minimally invasive aortic valve surgery has not been adopted by a significant proportion of cardiac surgeons despite proven benefits. This may be related to a high learning curve and technical issues requiring retraining. In this review, we discuss the data for minimally invasive aortic valve surgery and describe our operative technique for both ministernotomy and anterior thoracotomy approaches. We also discuss the advent of novel sutureless valves and how these techniques compare to available transcatheter aortic valve procedures.