Right anterior minithoracotomy versus conventional aortic valve replacement: A propensity score matched study

Midterm Outcomes of Right Anterior Mini Thoracotomy Aortic Valve Replacement

Background

Contemporary surgical approaches for aortic valve replacement (AVR) include full median sternotomy, hemi-sternotomy, and a right anterior mini thoracotomy (RAMT) approach. We report the midterm outcomes of RAMT for isolated AVR.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted, reporting the midterm outcomes of patients who underwent isolated RAMT AVR. The primary outcomes were death and disabling stroke within 30-days of surgery. The secondary outcomes were survival at latest follow-up assessment, hospital readmission for aortic valve disease, prosthetic valve function, and incidence of structural valve deterioration requiring reintervention on the aortic valve.

Results

Seventy patients underwent isolated RAMT AVR between February 2016 and February 2018. One patient died from a cardiac cause within 30 days of surgery, whereas none experienced disabling postoperative strokes. The mean follow-up period for the cohort was 74.46 ± 7.54 months. At 95 months, a total of 49 patients were alive. During the follow-up period, 2 patients underwent median sternotomy, 1 for mitral valve replacement and tricuspid repair, and 1 for coronary artery bypass grafting. At last follow-up assessment, the average mean transvalvular gradient was 12.11 ± 9.15 mm Hg. One patient developed prosthetic valve infective endocarditis, and 1 patient was found to have prosthetic valve thrombosis. Prosthetic valve function was normal in 66 patients. At 95 months, freedom from aortic valve reintervention was 98.6%, as 1 patient required redo aortic root surgery.

Conclusions

RAMT AVR can be done safely in the appropriate patient population. Midterm outcomes at our centre are promising, and they suggest that this approach is a good option for managing aortic stenosis.

Pulmonary endarterectomy through inverted-T upper hemisternotomy

Objective

We aimed to explore the feasibility of an inverted-T upper hemisternotomy approach for pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA) and report the results after 17 cases.

Methods

PEA was conducted through a 7-cm skin incision using an inverted-T upper hemisternotomy across the third intercostal spaces. Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) was established through central arterial and percutaneous femoral dual-staged venous cannulation. Perioperative and hemodynamic data were compared with 17 previous conventional PEAs performed by the same surgeon.

Results

From July 2022 to September 2023, 22 PEAs were performed, 17 through inverted-T upper hemisternotomy. Contraindications were an inferior caval vein filter, concomitant coronary revascularization or mitral valve surgery, pulmonary artery intimal sarcoma, and an emergency. Compared with 17 preceding conventional PEAs, there was no significant difference in demographics or in CPB time (274 [256-301] vs 264 [250-274] minutes, P = .1629), deep hypothermic circulatory arrest time (56 [45-65] vs 54 [50-58] minutes, P = .9587), preoperative pulmonary vascular resistance (4.12 [3.10-4.79] vs 4.49 [3.25-6.24] Wood units, P = .5890), 6-month postoperative pulmonary vascular resistance (1.90 [1.40-2.56] vs 1.83 [1.44-2.20] Wood units, P = .6374), or hospital stay (10 [8-12] vs 11 [9-14] days, P = .3327). Intravenous opioid use (0.29 [0.21-0.83] vs 2.99 [1.31-4.33] mg, P < 1.10-4) was significantly lower.

Conclusions

PEA using an inverted-T upper hemisternotomy approach is feasible and safe and obtains similar hemodynamic results compared with a full sternotomy approach without prolonging CPB and deep hypothermic circulatory arrest times. It offers bilateral treatment via a single incision and has few contraindications.

Right anterior thoracotomy vs. upper hemisternotomy for aortic valve replacement with Perceval S: is there a difference?

Background

Our study aimed to evaluate the early outcomes of aortic valve replacement with Perceval S sutureless valve through the right anterior thoracotomy and upper hemisternotomy approaches, and to determine if there are any differences between these two approaches.

Methods

We carried out a study using data from 174 patients who underwent minimally invasive Perceval S valve implantation for aortic valve stenosis between January 2018 and August 2023. This was a retrospective, single-center observational study. The patients were divided into two groups: the hemisternotomy group (n = 100) and the right anterior thoracotomy group (n = 74).

Results

The overall in-hospital mortality was 1,7%. The cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times were longer in the right anterior thoracotomy group (p < .001). There were no statistically significant differences in terms of stroke, paravalvular leak, mechanical ventilation time, blood transfusion requirements, pacemaker implantation, reexploration for bleeding, conversion, wound infection, or in-hospital stay. Postoperative chest drainage was lower (p < .001) and postoperative atrial fibrillation occurred less frequently (p = .044) in the right anterior thoracotomy group. The median intensive care unit stay was shorter in the right anterior thoracotomy group (p = .018).

Conclusion

Aortic valve replacement with the Perceval S valve through either an upper hemisternotomy or a right anterior thoracotomy is a procedure associated with low perioperative complication rates. Right anterior thoracotomy for an aortic valve replacement with the Perceval S valve was associated with lower postoperative bleeding, a lower postoperative atrial fibrillation incidence and a shorter intensive care unit stay compared to upper hemistornotomy.

Gender-Tailored Heart Team Decision Making Equalizes Outcomes for Female Patients after Aortic Valve Replacement through Right Anterior Small Thoracotomy (RAST)

BACKGROUND

Little is known about gender-dependent outcomes after aortic valve replacement (AVR) through right anterior thoracotomy (RAST). The aim of our study was to analyze the mid-term outcomes of our cohort.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective analysis of 338 patients (2013-2022). Subgroup analysis included a gender-dependent comparison of age groups ≤60 and >60 years.

RESULTS

Women were older (69.27 ± 7.98 vs. 64.15 ± 11.47, p < 0.001) with higher Euroscore II (1.25 ± 0.73 vs. 0.94 ± 0.45, p < 0.001). Bypass and cross-clamp time were shorter (109.36 ± 30.8 vs. 117.65 ± 33.1 minutes, p = 0.01; 68.26 ± 21.5 vs. 74.36 ± 23.3 minutes, p = 0.01), while ICU, hospital stay and atrial fibrillation were higher (2.48 ± 8.2 vs. 1.35 ± 1.4 days, p = 0.005; 11 ± 7.8 vs. 9.48 ± 2.3 days, p = 0.002; 6.7% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.024). Mortality was 0.9%, while stroke was 0.6%. Age subgroup analysis showed that women were older (p = 0.025) with longer ICU and hospital stays (p < 0.001, p = 0.007). On mid-term follow-up (4.52 ± 2.67 years) of 315 patients (94.3%), there was no significant difference in survival, MACCE and re-intervention comparing gender and age groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite older age, higher Euroscore II, longer ICU and hospital stay in women, mortality, MACCE and reoperation were low and comparable in gender and age groups. We believe that our patient-tailored heart team decision making combined with RAST translates into gender-tailored medicine, which equalizes the widely reported negative outcomes of female patients after cardiac surgery.

Right Anterior Minithoracotomy Approach for Aortic Valve Replacement

By sparing the sternum, the right anterior minithoracotomy (RAMT) approach may facilitate a quicker functional recovery when compared with conventional aortic valve replacement (AVR). In the following review, outcomes after RAMT AVR are compared with full sternotomy AVR. The RAMT approach is described, including suggestions for patient selection. The application of the RAMT approach for other cardiac procedures is also discussed.

Aortic valve replacement through right anterior mini-thoracotomy in patients with chronic severe aortic regurgitation: a retrospective single-center study

BACKGROUND

Aortic valve replacement (AVR) has recently been performed at many centers using a minimally invasive approach to reduce postoperative mortality, morbidity, and pain. Most previous reports on minimally invasive AVR (MiAVR) have mainly focused on aortic stenosis, and those exclusively dealing with aortic regurgitation (AR) are few. The purpose of this study was to investigate early surgical results and review our experience with patients with chronic severe AR who underwent AVR via right anterior mini-thoracotomy (RAT).

METHODS

Data were retrospectively collected in this single-center study. Eight patients who underwent RAT AVR between January 2020 and January 2024 were enrolled. Short-term outcomes, including the length of hospital stay, in-hospital mortality, postoperative complications, and echocardiographic data, were analyzed.

RESULTS

No in-hospital mortalities were observed. Postoperative atrial fibrillation occurred temporarily in three patients (37.5%). However, none required permanent pacemaker implantation or renal replacement therapy. The median values of ventilator time, length of intensive care unit stay, and hospital stay were 17 hours, 34.5 hours, and 9 days, respectively. Preoperative and postoperative measurements of left ventricular ejection fraction were similar. However, the left ventricular end systolic and diastolic diameters significantly decreased postoperatively from 42 mm to 35.5 mm (p=0.018) and 63 mm to 51 mm (p=0.012), respectively.

CONCLUSION

MiAVR via RAT is a safe and reproducible procedure with acceptable morbidity and complication rates in patients with chronic severe AR. Despite some limitations such as a narrow surgical field and demanding learning curve, MiAVR is a competent method for AR.

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.

Right Anterior versus Right Transaxillary Access for Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement: A Propensity Matched Competitive Analysis

(1) Background: Right anterior thoracotomy (RAT-AVR) has been the sole established sternum-sparing technique for minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MICS-AVR) thus far. Nevertheless, transaxillary access, known as Minimally Invasive Cardiac LATeral Surgery (MICLATS-AVR), represents the latest and innovative advancement in sternum-sparing MICS-AVR access routes. In this study, procedural and clinical outcomes of a substantial transaxillary MICS-AVR cohort are compared to those of a RAT-AVR control group; (2) Patients and Methods: This retrospective study included 918 consecutive patients who underwent MICS-AVR at our facility between 2014 and 2022. This cohort was divided into two surgical access-related groups: RAT-AVR (n = 492) and MICLATS-AVR (n = 426). Procedural data, operative morbidity, and mortality were compared between groups. Further analysis was performed using propensity score matching; (3) Results: After matching, 359 pairs of patients were included and analyzed. There were no notable differences observed between the two groups regarding major adverse cardio-cerebral events. Despite longer cardiopulmonary bypass time in the MICLATS-AVR group (63.1 ± 20.4 min vs. 66.4 ± 18.2 min; p ≤ 0.001) the skin-to-skin time (129.4 ± 35.9 min. vs. 126.5 ± 29.8 min.; p = 0.790) and the aortic cross-clamp time was comparable between both groups (41.9 ± 13.3 min. vs. 43.5 ± 14.4 min.; p = 0.182). The overall hospital stay was significantly shorter in the MICLATS-AVR cohort (9.7 ± 5.2 days vs. 9.2 ± 4.5 days; p = 0.01). Both groups were comparable in terms of postoperative morbidities. However, significantly lower rates of postoperative impaired wound healing were noted in the MICLATS-AVR group (11.7% vs. 3.9%, p < 0.001); (4) Conclusions: In comparing MICLATS-AVR and RAT-AVR, our study found MICLATS-AVR to be at least as safe and time-efficient as RAT-AVR, with no significant differences in MACCE. MICLATS-AVR showed a shorter hospital stay and lower postoperative wound issues, indicating its feasibility and safety as an alternative. Notably, MICLATS-AVR is sternum- and bone-sparing, preserving the right mammary artery, and facilitates combined procedures like multiple valve surgeries.

Limited versus full sternotomy for aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND

Aortic valve disease is a common condition easily treatable with cardiac surgery. This is conventionally performed by opening the sternum ('median sternotomy') and replacing the valve under cardiopulmonary bypass. Median sternotomy is well tolerated, but as less invasive options become available, the efficacy of limited incisions has been called into question. In particular, the effects of reducing the visibility and surgical access have raised safety concerns with regard to the placement of cannulae, venting of the heart, epicardial wire placement, and de-airing of the heart at the end of the procedure. These difficulties may increase operating times, affecting outcome. The benefits of smaller incisions are thought to include decreased pain; improved respiratory mechanics; reductions in wound infections, bleeding, and need for transfusion; shorter intensive care stay; better cosmesis; and a quicker return to normal activity. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2017, with seven new studies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement via a limited sternotomy versus conventional aortic valve replacement via median sternotomy in people with aortic valve disease requiring surgical replacement.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase from inception to August 2021, with no language limitations. We also searched two clinical trials registries and manufacturers' websites. We reviewed references of primary studies to identify any further studies of relevance.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing aortic valve replacement via a median sternotomy versus aortic valve replacement via a limited sternotomy. We excluded trials that performed other minimally invasive incisions such as mini-thoracotomies, port access, transapical, transfemoral or robotic procedures. Although some well-conducted prospective and retrospective case-control and cohort studies exist, these were not included in this review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial papers to extract data, assess quality, and identify risk of bias. A third review author provided arbitration where required. We determined the certainty of evidence using the GRADE methodology and summarised results of patient-relevant outcomes in a summary of findings table.

MAIN RESULTS

The review included 14 trials with 1395 participants. Most studies had at least two domains at high risk of bias. We analysed 14 outcomes investigating the effects of minimally invasive limited upper hemi-sternotomy on aortic valve replacement as compared to surgery performed via full median sternotomy. Upper hemi-sternotomy may have little to no effect on mortality versus full median sternotomy (risk ratio (RR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45 to 1.94; 10 studies, 985 participants; low-certainty evidence). Upper hemi-sternotomy for aortic valve replacement may increase cardiopulmonary bypass time slightly, although the evidence is very uncertain (mean difference (MD) 10.63 minutes, 95% CI 3.39 to 17.88; 10 studies, 1043 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and may increase aortic cross-clamp time slightly (MD 6.07 minutes, 95% CI 0.79 to 11.35; 12 studies, 1235 participants; very low-certainty evidence), although the evidence is very uncertain. Most studies had at least two domains at high risk of bias. Postoperative blood loss was probably lower in the upper hemi-sternotomy group (MD -153 mL, 95% CI -246 to -60; 8 studies, 767 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Low-certainty evidence suggested that there may be no change in pain scores by upper hemi-sternotomy (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.19, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.04; 5 studies, 649 participants). Upper hemi-sternotomy may result in little to no difference in quality of life (MD 0.03 higher, 95% CI 0 to 0.06 higher; 4 studies, 624 participants; low-certainty evidence). Two studies reporting index admission costs concluded that limited sternotomy may be more costly at index admission in the UK National Health Service (MD 1190 GBP more, 95% CI 420 GBP to 1970 GBP, 2 studies, 492 participants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence was of very low to moderate certainty. Sample sizes were small and underpowered to demonstrate differences in some outcomes. Clinical heterogeneity was also noted. Considering these limitations, there may be little to no effect on mortality. Differences in extracorporeal support times are uncertain, comparing upper hemi-sternotomy to full sternotomy for aortic valve replacement. Before widespread adoption of the minimally invasive approach can be recommended, there is a need for a well-designed and adequately powered prospective randomised controlled trial. Such a study would benefit from also performing a robust cost analysis. Growing patient preference for minimally invasive techniques merits thorough quality of life analyses to be included as end points, as well as quantitative measures of physiological reserve.

Novel hardening bone putty enhances sternal closure and accelerates postoperative recovery

OBJECTIVES

Regaining and maintaining sternal stability are key to recovery after cardiac surgery and resuming baseline quality of life. Montage (ABYRX) is a moldable, calcium phosphate-based putty that adheres to bleeding bone, hardens after application, and is resorbed and replaced with bone during the remodeling process. We evaluate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of enhanced sternal closure with this novel putty to accelerate recovery in patients after sternotomy.

METHODS

A single-center, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial was performed (NCT03365843). Patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery via sternotomy received sternal closure with either Montage bone putty and wire cerclage (enhanced sternal closure; n = 33) or wire cerclage alone (control; n = 27). Standardized patient-reported outcomes assessed health-related quality of life (EQ-5D Index) and physical disability (Health Assessment Questionnaire). A Likert-type 11-point scale quantified pain. Spirometry assessed respiratory function. Patients reached 6-week follow-up, with 1-year follow-up for safety end points.

RESULTS

There were no device-related adverse events. Enhanced sternal closure improved physical functional recovery (reduced Healthcare Index and Quality) and quality of life (increased EQ-5D Index) at day 5/discharge, week 2, and week 4. Enhanced sternal closure reduced incisional pain while resting, breathing, sleeping, and walking at day 5/discharge. Enhanced sternal closure reduced chest wall and back pain at day 3 and day 5 discharge. A higher proportion of patients with enhanced sternal closure recovered to 60% of their baseline forced vital capacity by day 5/discharge. Enhanced sternal closure shortened hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Enhanced sternal closure improves and accelerates postoperative recovery compared with conventional wire closure. Earlier discharge may provide substantial cost benefits for the healthcare system.

An international survey-based assessment of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery

OBJECTIVES

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) has been shown to be safe and feasible however its adoption has lagged globally. The international consortium is lacking a set of guidelines that are specific to MIMVS. The aim of this study was to capture the practices of MIMVS in different centres.

METHODS

A survey was constructed containing 52 multiple-choice and open-ended questions about various aspects of MIMVS. The survey was sent to centres that routinely and frequently perform MIMVS. All surgeons provided informed consent for participating in the survey and publication of data.

RESULTS

The survey was sent to 75 known surgeons from whom 32 (42%) completed the survey. All survey responders performed >25 MIMVS cases annually. Twenty (68%) of the surgeons thought that simulation training, MIMVS fellowship and proctorship are all essential prior to commencing an MIMVS program. Eleven (34%) of the surgeons stated that 50-100 MIMVS cases are required to overcome the learning curve, followed by 6 (18%) who said 21-30 cases should suffice. Eighteen (62%) of the surgeons had adopted a fully endoscopic approach for their MIMVS, followed by 15 (51%) surgeons who had performed cases via endoscopic-assisted strategies, 5 (17%) surgeons had conducted the operation under direct visualization and 6 (20%) surgeons had used a robot for their MIMVS.

CONCLUSIONS

The study highlights a marked variability on training and approach to MIMVS. Consensus guidelines should be established to allow standardization of MIMVS.

Outcomes and residual gap analysis after the modified cryomaze procedure performed via right minithoracotomy versus sternotomy

Objectives

Developments in both technique and technology have enabled surgeons to perform the maze procedure via right minithoracotomy (RMT) to treat atrial fibrillation (AF). This study aimed to clarify the outcomes of the modified cryomaze procedure via the RMT approach compared with the sternotomy approach.

Methods

The study cohort comprised 803 consecutive patients who underwent a modified cryomaze procedure (130 via RMT and 673 via sternotomy) for paroxysmal AF and persistent AF from January 2001 to March 2022. The Gray test was applied to compare the incidence of recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmias. Additionally, residual electrical gaps were investigated in the patients who underwent additional catheter ablation for recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmias.

Results

The respective 1-, 2-, and 3-year cumulative incidences of recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmias were 13.1%, 19.5%, and 23.1% in the RMT group, and 9.3%, 10.9%, and 12.8% in the sternotomy group (Gray test P = .036). All 31 patients with recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmias underwent additional catheter ablation, comprising 14 (10.8%) in the RMT group and 17 (2.5%) in the sternotomy group. There was a significant intergroup difference in the site of residual electrical gaps; the RMT group more frequently had residual gaps in the tricuspid annulus than the sternotomy group (6.2% vs 0.4%; P < .001).

Conclusions

In the modified cryomaze procedure via the RMT approach, ablation failure is more likely to occur at the tricuspid annulus, where the surgical field of view is relatively poor compared with the sternotomy approach. Therefore, surgical ablation should be performed with caution when the RMT approach is used.

Comparative effects of minimally invasive approaches vs. conventional for obese patients undergoing aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive approaches like mini-thoracotomy and mini-sternotomy for Aortic Valve Replacement (AVR) showed impressive outcomes. However, their advantages for obese patients are questionable. We aimed in this network meta-analysis to compare three surgical approaches: Full sternotomy (FS), Mini-sternotomy (MS), and Mini-thoracotomy (MT) for obese patients undergoing AVR.

METHODS

We followed the PRISMA extension for this network meta-analysis. PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane searched through March 2023 for relevant articles. The analysis was performed using R version 4.2.3.

RESULTS

Out of 344, 8 articles met the criteria with 1392 patients. The main outcomes assessed were perioperative mortality, re-exploration, atrial fibrillation, renal failure, ICU stay, hospital stay, cross-clamp time, and bypass time. In favor of MS, the length of ICU stay and hospital stay was significantly lower than for FS [MD -0.84, 95%CI (-1.26; -0.43)], and [MD -2.56, 95%CI (-3.90; -1.22)], respectively. Regarding peri-operative mortality, FS showed a significantly higher risk compared to MS [RR 2.28, 95%CI (1.01;5.16)]. Also, patients who underwent minimally invasive approaches; MT and MS, required less need of re-exploration compared to FS [RR 0.10, 95%CI (0.02;0.45)], and [RR 0.33, 95%CI (0.14;0.79)], respectively. However, Intraoperative timings; including aortic cross-clamp, and cardiopulmonary bypass time, were significantly lower with FS than for MS [MD -9.16, 95%CI (-1.88; -16.45)], [MD -9.61, 95%CI (-18.64; -0.59)], respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our network meta-analysis shows that minimally invasive approaches offer some advantages for obese patients undergoing AVR over full sternotomy. Suggesting that these approaches might be considered more beneficial alternatives for obese patients undergoing AVR.

Safety and Efficacy of the Transaxillary Access for Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Surgery

Background and Objectives: Transaxillary access is one of the latest innovations for minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MICS-AVR). This study compares clinical performance in a large transaxillary MICS-AVR group to a propensity-matched sternotomy control group. Materials and Methods: This study enrolled 908 patients undergoing isolated AVR with a mean age of 69.4 ± 18.0 years, logistic EuroSCORE of 4.0 ± 3.9%, and body mass index (BMI) of 27.3 ± 6.1 kg/m2. The treatment group comprised 454 consecutive transaxillary MICS-AVR patients. The control group was 1:1 propensity-matched out of 3115 consecutive sternotomy aortic valve surgeries. Endocarditis, redo, and combined procedures were excluded. The multivariate matching model included age, left ventricular ejection fraction, logistic EuroSCORE, pulmonary hypertension, coronary artery disease, chronic lung disease, and BMI. Results: Propensity-matching was successful with subsequent comparable clinical baselines in both groups. MICS-AVR had longer skin-to-skin time (120.0 ± 31.5 min vs. 114.2 ± 28.7 min; p < 0.001) and more frequent bleeding requiring chest reopening (5.0% vs. 2.4%; p < 0.010), but significantly less packed red blood cell transfusions (0.57 ± 1.6 vs. 0.82 ± 1.6; p = 0.040). In addition, MICS-AVR patients had fewer access site wound abnormalities (1.5% vs. 3.7%; p = 0.038), shorter intensive care unit stays (p < 0.001), shorter ventilation times (p < 0.001), and shorter hospital stays (7.0 ± 5.1 days vs. 11.1 ± 6.5; p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in stroke > Rankin 2 (0.9% vs. 1.1%; p = 0.791), renal replacement therapy (1.5% vs. 2.4%; p = 0.4762), and hospital mortality (0.9% vs. 1.5%; p = 0.546). Conclusions: Transaxillary MICS-AVR is at least as safe as AVR by sternotomy and can be performed in the same time frame. Its advantages are fewer transfusions and quicker postoperative recovery with a significantly shorter hospital stay. The cosmetic result and unrestricted physical abilities due to the untouched sternum and ribs are unique advantages of transaxillary access.

Comprehensive characterization of the postoperative pericardial inflammatory response: Potential implications for clinical outcomes

Objective

There is a paucity of data on the inflammatory response that takes place in the pericardial space after cardiac surgery. This study provides a comprehensive assessment of the local postoperative inflammatory response.

Methods

Forty-three patients underwent cardiotomy, where native pericardial fluid was aspirated and compared with postoperative pericardial effluent collected at 4, 24, and 48 hours' postcardiopulmonary bypass. Flow cytometry was used to define the levels and proportions of specific immune cells. Samples were also probed for concentrations of inflammatory cytokines, matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs), and tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases (TIMPs).

Results

Preoperatively, the pericardial space mainly contains macrophages and T cells. However, the postsurgical pericardial space was populated predominately by neutrophils, which constituted almost 80% of immune cells present, and peaked at 24 hours. When surgical approaches were compared, minimally invasive surgery was associated with fewer neutrophils in the pericardial space at 4 hours' postsurgery. Analysis of the intrapericardial concentrations of inflammatory mediators showed interleukin-6, MMP-9, and TIMP-1 to be highest postsurgery. Over time, MMP-9 concentrations decreased significantly, whereas TIMP-1 levels increased, resulting in a significant reduction of the ratio of MMP:TIMP after surgery, suggesting that active inflammatory processes may influence extracellular matrix remodeling.

Conclusions

These results show that cardiac surgery elicits profound alterations in the immune cell profile in the pericardial space. Defining the cellular and molecular mediators that drive pericardial-specific postoperative inflammatory processes may allow for targeted therapies to reduce immune-mediated complications.

Guidelines on enhanced recovery after cardiac surgery under cardiopulmonary bypass or off-pump

OBJECTIVE

To provide recommendations for enhanced recovery after cardiac surgery (ERACS) based on a multimodal perioperative medicine approach in adult cardiac surgery patients with the aim of improving patient satisfaction, reducing postoperative mortality and morbidity, and reducing the length of hospital stay.

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 20 experts from the French Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine (Société française d'anesthésie et de réanimation, SFAR) and the French Society of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (Société française de chirurgie thoracique et cardio-vasculaire, SFCTCV) was convened. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guideline process was conducted independently of any industry funding. The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide the assessment of the quality of evidence.

METHODS

Six fields were defined: (1) selection of the patient pathway and its information; (2) preoperative management and rehabilitation; (3) anaesthesia and analgesia for cardiac surgery; (4) surgical strategy for cardiac surgery and bypass management; (5) patient blood management; and (6) postoperative enhanced recovery. For each field, the objective of the recommendations was to answer questions formulated according to the PICO model (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome). Based on these questions, an extensive bibliographic search was carried out and analyses were performed using the GRADE approach. The recommendations were formulated according to the GRADE methodology and then voted on by all the experts according to the GRADE grid method.

RESULTS

The SFAR/SFCTCV guideline panel provided 33 recommendations on the management of patients undergoing cardiac surgery under cardiopulmonary bypass or off-pump. After three rounds of voting and several amendments, a strong agreement was reached for the 33 recommendations. Of these recommendations, 10 have a high level of evidence (7 GRADE 1+ and 3 GRADE 1-); 19 have a moderate level of evidence (15 GRADE 2+ and 4 GRADE 2-); and 4 are expert opinions. Finally, no recommendations were provided for 3 questions.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong agreement existed among the experts to provide recommendations to optimise the complete perioperative management of patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Aortic valve replacement via right anterolateral minithoracotomy: preventing adverse events during the initial learning curve

BACKGROUND

Despite excellent outcomes and reduced invasiveness, the right anterolateral thoracotomy approach for aortic valve replacement (RALT-AVR) has not been broadly adopted. This study provides results regarding the initial experience and learning curve of a single surgeon performing this procedure.

METHODS

Periprocedural details and postoperative outcomes of the first 100 consecutive patients who underwent RALT-AVR at our institution were retrospectively analyzed. We conducted a cumulative sum analysis of surgical failure, defined as occurrence of 30-day-mortality, surgical revision for bleeding, conversion to sternotomy, 3^rd degree heart block, paravalvular leakage, postoperative stroke or mean transvalvular gradient >20 mmHg.

RESULTS

The cohort was of low surgical risk (mean EuroSCORE II 1.31%±0.85, mean STS PROM 1.45%±0.97), 58% were males. Median cross-clamp time was 67.5 (57.8-76) min, median CPB time 105 (91.8-119) min, and median operation time 164.5 (144.5-183.2) min. There were no conversions to full sternotomy, 4 cases of revision for bleeding and 2 pacemaker implantations for 3^rd degree heart block. Prosthesis function was good (median ΔPmean 10.9 [7.4-13.6] mmHg). Thirty-day-mortality was 0%. The log-likelihood graph never crossed the upper boundary, and after a steady decrease, crossed the lower boundary at 93 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

RALT-AVR can be performed with acceptable procedural times and satisfactory outcomes. For a well-trained surgeon, adapting to this new procedure does not expose patients to an increased risk, when patient selection and procedural planning are applied appropriately. Cumulative sum failure analysis is an appropriate tool to monitor the transition from standard AVR to the technically more demanding RALT-AVR.

Minimally invasive and full sternotomy in aortic valve replacement: a comparative early operative outcomes

Introduction

aortic valve replacement is usually performed through a median full sternotomy (MFS) in our department. Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MIAVR) has been recently adopted as a new approach. According to the literature, the superiority of MIAVR is controversial. In this study we report early post-operative outcomes in MIAVR compared with MFS access with reference to blood Loss, wound infections, post-operative recovery, morbidity and mortality.

Methods

this study was a prospective data collection from 36 consecutive patients undergoing isolated valve replacement. Two population study was identified, MIAVR group (group I n=18) and MFS group (group II n=18). Patients´ data were collected and analyzed using IBM SPSS statistics 21 software and Khi2 test has been used to compare the variables. The study variables are presented as numbers, percentage, median with interquartile range. Pre-operative planning was performed so that to obtain similar characteristics.

Results

in group I, upper mini-sternotomy was used in 12 patients and right mini-thoracotomy in 6 patients. There was no difference in term of mortality and morbidity. MIAVR was associated with longer CPB time (93.25 (58-161) vs 131 (75-215) mins, P=0.047) with no significant difference in term of ACC time (81 (33-162) vs 58.8 (59-102) mins P=0.158). MIAVR´ Patients had likely lower incidence of red blood cells transfusion (16.7 vs 52.3%) without significant difference about post-operative haemoglobin (P = 0,330). Patients in group I had shorter ventilation time (2.35 (1-12) vs 9.3 (1-48) hours P < 0.01), shorter ICU stay (2.44 (1-8) vs 4.25 (1-9) days, P = 0,024). The length of hospital stay was shorter, 6.5 (5-9) days in group I vs 7.4 (6-11), P=0.0274. Length of chest tube stay was shorter in group I (mean 1.53 vs 2.4 days, P=0,033). Wound infections were not found in both groups.

Conclusion

minimally invasive aortic valve replacement is associated with less blood loss, faster post-operative recovery faster post-operative recovery but increase operation time.

Iatrogenic Acute Aortic Dissection in the Era of Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery - Experience of a Center and Review of Literature

Introduction

Iatrogenic acute aortic dissection (IAAD) type A is a rare but potentially fatal complication of cardiac surgery.

Methods

The purpose of this article is to review the literature since the first reports of IAAD in 1978, examining its clinical characteristics and describing operative details and surgical outcomes. Moreover, we reviewed the recent literature to identify current trends and risk factors for IAAD in minimally invasive cardiac surgery procedures, often related to femoral artery cannulation for retrograde perfusion.

Results

We found that IAAD ranges from 0.04 to 0.29% of cardiac patients in overall trials and ranged from 0.12 to 0.16% between 1978-1990, before the minimally invasive surgical era. And we concluded that since the first cases to the recent reports, the incidence of IAAD has not significantly changed. As minimally invasive procedures are on the rise, some authors think that the incidence of IAAD could increase in the future; we think that using all the precaution - such a strict monitoring of perfusion pressure throughout the intervention, avoiding extremely high jet pressures using vasodilators, repositioning of arterial cannula, or splitting perfusion in both femoral arteries -, this complication can be extremely reduced. Finally, we describe a very singular case occurring during mitral valve replacement followed by spontaneous dissection of left anterior descending artery one month later.

Conclusion

The present article adds to the literature a more detailed clinical picture of this entity, including patients' characteristics, the mechanism, timing, and localization of the tear, and mortality details.

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.

Right anterior mini thoracotomy approach for isolated aortic valve replacement: Early outcomes at a Canadian center

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this manuscript was to report the clinical outcomes of the initial series of 100 consecutive Right Anterior Mini Thoracotomy (RAMT) aortic valve replacement (AVR) implantations at a Canadian Center.

METHODS

This retrospective study reported the clinical outcomes of the first 100 patients who underwent the RAMT approach for isolated surgical AVR in Calgary, Canada, between 2016 and 2020. Primary outcomes were death within 30 days of surgery and disabling stroke. Secondary outcomes included surgical times, the need for permanent pacemaker (PPM), incidence of postoperative blood transfusion in the intensive care unit (ICU), postsurgical atrial fibrillation (AF), length of ICU/hospital stay, postsurgical AF, residual paravalvular leak (PVL), postoperative transvalvular gradient, need for postsurgical intravenous opioids, duration of invasive ventilation in the ICU, and chest tube output in the first 12 h postsurgery.

RESULTS

In this study, 54 patients were male, and the average age of the cohort was 72 years. Mortality within 30 days of surgery was 1% with no disabling postoperative strokes. Mean cardiopulmonary bypass and cross clamp was 84 and 55 min, respectively. PPM rate was 3%, incidence of blood transfusion in the ICU was 4%, and the rate of postoperative AF was 23%. Median length of ICU and hospital stay was 1 and 5 days, respectively. Rate of mild or greater residual PVL was 3%, while the average residual transvalvular mean gradient was 8.5 mmHg.

CONCLUSION

The sternum-sparing RAMT approach can be safely integrated into surgical practice as a minimally invasive alternative for isolated AVR, and can reduce postoperative bleeding and narcotic requirements.

The First 100 Cases of Two Innovations Combined: Video-Assisted Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement Through Right Anterior Mini-Thoracotomy Using a Novel Aortic Prosthesis

Introduction

Aortic valve replacement (AVR) via right anterior mini-thoracotomy (RAMT) is less traumatic than via other surgical routes; using a novel aortic valve may confer long-term resistance against valve deterioration, and thus be useful in younger, more active patients. Here we aim to validate using the INSPIRIS RESILIA valve with minimally invasive RAMT.

Methods

Between April 2017 and June 2019, 100 patients underwent video-assisted minimally invasive AVR by RAMT, using the INSPIRIS RESILIA aortic valve. Cannulation for cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) was through femoral vessels. Clinical data were prospectively entered into our institutional database.

Results

Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and cross-clamping times were 79 ± 38 and 41 ± 17 min. Surgical access was successful in 100% of cases. There were no cases of intraoperative mortality, 30-day mortality, cerebrovascular events, rethoracotomy for bleeding, valve-related reoperation, right internal mammary artery injury, or conversion to sternotomy. Intensive care and hospital stays were 2 ± 1 and 6 ± 3 days, respectively. One patient had a pacemaker fitted. Postoperative dialysis was necessary in one patient. Trace to mild aortic valve regurgitation occurred in two patients. No structural valve deterioration (SVD) and paravalvular leak were seen. At 1-year follow-up mean effective orifice area (EOA) was 1.8 ± 0.1 cm², peak gradient was 22.1 ± 3.1 mmHg, and mean gradient was 11.5 ± 2.3 mmHg.

Conclusion

Our preliminary experience suggests that RAMT for AVR using the INSPIRIS RESILIA aortic valve is safe, effective, and reproducible. Larger studies are needed to evaluate the long-term efficacy and durability of this new valve.

Sutureless aortic valves in elderly patients with aortic stenosis and intermediate-risk profile

AIMS

Sutureless valves became an alternative to standard bioprostheses, allowing surgeons to significantly reduce cross-clamping and extracorporeal circulation times, with a potential positive impact on major postoperative complications. The aim of this European multicentre study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of sutureless valves in patients with an intermediate-risk profile undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR).

METHODS

We investigated early and mid-term outcomes of 518 elderly patients with aortic stenosis at intermediate-risk profile (mean STS Score 6.1 ± 2%) undergoing AVR with sutureless aortic valve. Primary endpoints were 30-day mortality and freedom from all-cause death at follow-up. The secondary endpoint was survival freedom from MACCEs [all-cause death, stroke/transitory ischemic attack (TIA), bleeding, myocardial infarction, aortic regurgitation Grade II, endocarditis, reintervention and pacemaker implant; VARC 1--2 criteria].

RESULTS

Sutureless valve implantation was successfully performed in 508 patients, with a procedural success rate of 98.1% (508/518) as per VARC criteria. Concomitant myocardial revascularization [coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)] was performed in 74 out of 518 patients (14.3%). In-hospital mortality was 1.9% (10/518). Postoperative complications included revision for bleeding (23/518; 4.4%), prolonged intubation more than 48h (4/518; 0.7%), acute renal failure (14/518; 2.7%), stroke/TIA (11/518; 2.1%), pacemaker implantation (26/518; 5.1%) and aortic regurgitation more than Grade II (7/518; 1.4%). At 48-month follow-up, Kaplan-Meier overall survival and freedom from MACCEs in patients receiving isolated AVR were 83.7% [95% confidence interval (95% CI): 81.1-86.3] and 78.4% (95% CI: 75.5-81.4), respectively, while in patients with concomitant CABG, Kaplan-Meier overall survival and freedom from MACCEs were 82.3% (95% CI: 73.3-91.3) and 79.1% (95% CI: 69.9-88.3), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The use of sutureless aortic valves in elderly patients with an intermediate-risk profile provided excellent early and mid-term outcomes, providing a reliable tool in patients undergoing surgical AVR in this specific subset of population. These preliminary data need to be investigated with a TAVI control-group in further studies.

Minimally-invasive versus transcatheter aortic valve implantation: systematic review with meta-analysis of propensity-matched studies

Background

Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MiAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) provide aortic valve replacement (AVR) by less invasive methods than conventional surgical AVR, by avoiding complete sternotomy. This study directly compares and analyses the available evidence for early outcomes between these two AVR methods.

Methods

Electronic databases were searched from inception until August 2019 for studies comparing MiAVR to TAVI, according to predefined search criteria. Propensity-matched studies with sufficient data were included in a meta-analysis.

Results

Eight studies with 9,744 patients were included in the quantitative analysis. Analysis of risk-matched patients showed no difference in early mortality (RR 0.76, 95% CI, 0.37–1.54, P=0.44). MiAVR had a signal towards lower rate of postoperative stroke, although this did not reach statistical significance (OR 0.42, 95% CI, 0.13–1.29, P=0.13). MiAVR had significantly lower rates of new pacemaker (PPM) requirement (OR 0.29, 95% CI, 0.16–0.52, P<0.0001) and postoperative aortic insufficiency (AI) or paravalvular leak (PVL) (OR 0.05, 95% CI, 0.01–0.20, P<0.0001) compared to TAVI, (OR 0.42, 95% CI, 0.13–1.29, P=0.13), while acute kidney injury (AKI) was higher in MiAVR compared to TAVI (11.1% vs. 5.2%, OR 2.28, 95% CI, 1.25–4.16, P=0.007).

Conclusions

In patients of equivalent surgical risk scores, MiAVR may be performed with lower rates of postoperative PPM requirement and AI/PVL, higher rates of AKI and no statistical difference in postoperative stroke or short-term mortality, compared to TAVI. Further prospective trials are needed to validate these results.

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.

Clinical study of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement through a right parasternal second intercostal transverse incision: The first Chinese experience

BACKGROUND

There is an increasing demand for minimally invasive aortic valve replacement. This study aimed to investigate the safety and feasibility of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement through a right parasternal second intercostal transverse incision.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study, and we collected information from 111 patients who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement surgery performed by the same surgeon from January 2018 to December 2019. According to the operative approach, the patients were divided into a sternotomy aortic valve replacement (SAVR) group (n = 62) and a minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (Mini-AVR) group (n = 49). We compared the intraoperative and postoperative data between the two groups.

RESULT

There was no difference in preoperative data between the Mini-AVR and SAVR. The postoperative ventilator-assisted time, CSICU time and postoperative hospital stay of the Mini-AVR were shorter than those of the SAVR [(15.45 ± 5.75) VS (18.51 ± 6.71) h; (1.77 ± 0.31) VS (2.04 ± 0.63) d; (8.69 ± 2.75) VS (10.77 ± 2.94) d], and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Mini-AVR had lower postoperative drainage and blood transfusion rates in the first 24 h than SAVR [(109.86 ± 125.98) VS (508.84 ± 311.70) ml; 22.4% VS 46.8%], and the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). The incidence of postoperative AF in the Mini-AVR group was also lower than that in the SAVR group (10.2% VS 30.6%), and the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Mini-AVR has the advantages of less ventilator time, a reduced need for blood transfusion, less AF and a faster recovery. Mini-AVR is a safe and feasible surgical technique that is worthy of clinical application.

Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement with sutureless bioprosthesis through right minithoracotomy with completely central cannulation-Early results in 203 patients

OBJECTIVES

Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (mini-AVR) might improve clinical outcomes, particularly in high-risk and elderly patients. Sutureless/rapid deployment bioprosthesis can offer advantage of decreasing the cross-clamp time (XCT) and easing the procedure. Our aim was to evaluate the safety and perioperative outcomes of mini-AVR using sutureless bioprothesis via the right minithoracotomy approach with our modified technique of central cannulation.

METHODS

We performed a single-center retrospective analysis of 203 patients consecutively undergoing isolated AVR between March 2016 and June 2018 with the right minithoracotomy approach and our modified technique of central cannulation. Aortic valve diseases were stenosis (89.9%), regurgitation (1.6%), and mixed valve disease (8.5%). Patients with concomitant procedures were excluded. Primary endpoints were 30-day and 4-month mortality.

RESULTS

Mean age was 76 ± 6.2 years, 63 (31%) patients were 80 years or older. Cardiopulmonary bypass and XCT were 60.5 (39-153) and 35 (24-76) min, respectively. Thirty-day and 4-month mortality were 1% (two patients). We have observed minor paravalvular leak (PVL) which occurred in seven patients (3.4%), and no moderate/severe PVL was found perioperatively. One patient developed moderate/severe PVL during the 4-month follow-up. There was no structural valve degeneration. Two (1%) patients needed conversion to full sternotomy, and two (1%) patients to ministernotomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Mini-AVR via the right minithoracotomy approach with central cannulation is an effective and safe procedure and demonstrates excellent early clinical outcomes. This approach can be particularly valuable in higher risk and elderly patients.

Current Surgical Risk Scores Overestimate Risk in Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement

OBJECTIVE

Risk-scoring systems for surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) were largely derived from sternotomy cases. We evaluated the accuracy of current risk scores in predicting outcomes after minimally invasive AVR (mini-AVR). Because transcatheter AVR (TAVR) is being considered for use in low-risk patients with aortic stenosis, accurate mini-AVR risk assessment is necessary.

METHODS

We reviewed 1,018 consecutive isolated mini-AVR cases (2009 to 2015). After excluding patients with Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS-PROM) scores ≥4, we calculated each patient's European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) II, TAVR Risk Score (TAVR-RS), and age, creatinine, and ejection fraction score (ACEF). We compared all 4 scores' accuracy in predicting mini-AVR 30-day mortality by computing each score's observed-to-expected mortality ratio (O:E). Area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves tested discrimination, and the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit tested calibration.

RESULTS

Among 941 patients (mean age, 72 ± 12 years), 6 deaths occurred within 30 days (actual mortality rate, 0.6%). All 4 scoring systems overpredicted expected mortality after mini-AVR: ACEF (1.4%), EuroSCORE II (1.9%), STS-PROM (2.0%), and TAVR-RS (2.1%). STS-PROM best estimated risk for patients with STS-PROM scores 0 to <1 (0.6 O:E), ACEF for patients with STS-PROM scores 2 to <3 (0.6 O:E), and TAVR-RS for patients with STS-PROM scores 3 to <4 (0.7 O:E). ROC curves showed only fair discrimination and calibration across all risk scores.

CONCLUSIONS

In low-risk patients who underwent mini-AVR, current surgical scoring systems overpredicted mortality 2-to-3-fold. Alternative dedicated scoring systems for mini-AVR are needed for more accurate outcomes assessment.

Minithoracotomy versus full sternotomy for isolated aortic valve replacement: Propensity matched data from two centers

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive approaches to isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR) continue to gain popularity. This study compares outcomes of AVR through right anterolateral thoracotomy (RALT) to those of AVR through full median sternotomy (MS).

METHODS

Outcomes of two propensity-matched groups of 85 each, out of 250 patients that underwent isolated AVR through RALT or MS at our two institutions, were compared in a retrospective study.

RESULTS

Propensity score matching resulted in 85 matched pairs with balanced preoperative characteristics. Procedure times were significantly shorter in the RALT group (median difference: 13 min [-25 to -0.5]; p = .039), cardiopulmonary bypass times were longer (median difference: 17 min [10-23.5]; p = < .001) and ventilation times shorter (median difference: 259 min [-390 to -122.5]; p = < .001). There was no significant difference in aortic cross-clamp times (median difference: 1.5 min [-3.5 to 6.5]; p = .573). The RALT group had lower rates of perioperative platelet transfusions (odds ratio [OR] = 0.00 [0.00-0.59]; p = .0078) and postoperative pneumonia (OR = 0.10 [0.00-0.70]; p = .012), as well as shorter hospitalization times (median difference: 2.5 days [-4.5 to -1]; p = .005). There were no significant differences regarding paravalvular leakage (p = .25), postoperative stroke (p = 1), postoperative atrial fibrillation (p = .12) or 1-year-mortality (p = 1).

CONCLUSIONS

This study found RALT to be an equally safe approach to surgical AVR as MS. Furthermore, RALT showed advantages regarding important aspects of postoperative recovery, especially concerning pulmonary function.

[Aortic valve replacement via J-shaped partial upper sternotomy: randomized trial, mid-term results]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of aortic valve replacement through upper partial J-shaped sternotomy compared to conventional sternotomy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

There were 240 procedures of isolated aortic valve replacement for the period 2012-2017. According to inclusion criteria, 112 patients were randomized into 2 groups: group I - median sternotomy, group II - upper partial J-shaped sternotomy. Mean age of patients was 56.1±14.3 and 53.1±14.9 years, respectively (p=0.284). Females prevailed in both groups (55.4% vs. 57.1%, p=0.848). Peak pressure gradient on the aortic valve was 106.2±23.9 and 102.8±25.3 mm Hg, respectively (p=0.484).

RESULTS

In-hospital mortality was 1.8% (n=1) in group I (p=0.315). Incidence of postoperative complications (complete atrioventricular blockade, ventricular septal defect) was similar (p=1.0). Mean time cross clamping in I and II groups was 65.5±12.5 and 64.7±13.1 min (p=0.729). Mean follow-up period was 31.6 and 33.5 months, respectively. Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 92.6 and 93.0%, respectively (log-rank test=0,767). Freedom from thromboembolic events was 91.7 and 90% (log-rank test=0.213).

CONCLUSION. U

Pper partial J-shaped sternotomy is safe and effective for aortic valve surgery and characterized by similar outcomes compared to conventional sternotomy.

Right anterior mini-thoracotomy and sutureless valves: the perfect marriage

Background

A minimally invasive approach (MIA) reduces mortality and morbidity in patients referred for aortic valve replacement (AVR). Sutureless technology facilitates a MIA. We describe our experience with the sutureless Perceval (LivaNova, Italy) aortic bioprosthesis through a right anterior mini-thoracotomy (RAMT) approach.

Methods

Between March 2011 and October 2019, 1,049 patients underwent AVR with Perceval bioprosthesis. Five hundred and three patients (48%) were operated through a RAMT approach in the second intercostal space. Considering only isolated AVR (881), 98% of patients were operated with MIA, and Perceval in RAMT approach was performed in 57% of these patients. Eight patients (1.6%) had previously undergone cardiac surgery. The prosthesis sizes implanted were: S (n=91), M (n=154), L (n=218) and XL (n=40). Concomitant procedures were mitral valve surgery (n=6), tricuspid valve repair (n=1), mitral valve repair and tricuspid valve repair (n=1) and miectomy (n=2). Mean age was 78±4 years (range, 65-89 years), 317 patients were female (63%) and EuroSCORE II was 5.9%±8.4%.

Results

The 30-day mortality was 0.8% (4/503). Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and aortic cross-clamp times were 81.6±30.8 and 50.3±24.5 minutes respectively for stand-alone procedures. In two patients, early moderate paravalvular leakage appeared as a result of incomplete expansion of the sutureless valve due to oversizing of the bioprosthesis, requiring reoperations at two and nine postoperative days with sutured aortic bioprosthesis implantation. Permanent pacemaker implantation within the first thirty days was necessary in 26 (5.2%) patients. At the mean follow-up of 4.6 years (range, 1 month to 8.6 years), survival was 96%, freedom from reoperation was 99.2%, and mean transvalvular pressure gradient was 11.9±4.3 mmHg.

Conclusions

AVR with the Perceval bioprosthesis in a RAMT approach is a safe and feasible procedure associated with low mortality and excellent hemodynamic performance. Sutureless technology facilitates a RAMT approach.

Comparison of outcomes between minimally invasive and median sternotomy for double and triple valve surgery: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Limited data exists demonstrating the efficacy of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) compared to median sternotomy (MS) for multiple valvular disease (MVD). This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare operative and peri-operative outcomes of MIS vs MS in MVD.

METHODS

PubMed, Ovid, and Embase were searched from inception until August 2019 for randomized and observational studies comparing MIS and MS in patients with MVD. Clinical outcomes of intra- and postoperative times, reoperation for bleeding and surgical site infection were evaluated.

RESULTS

Five observational studies comparing 340 MIS vs 414 MS patients were eligible for qualitative and quantitative review. The quality of evidence assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale was good for all included studies. Meta-analysis demonstrated increased cardiopulmonary bypass time for MIS patients (weighted mean difference [WMD], 0.487; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.365-0.608; P < .0001). Similarly, aortic cross-clamp time was longer in patients undergoing MIS (WMD, 0.632; 95% CI, 0.509-0.755; P < .0001). No differences were found in operative mortality, reoperation for bleeding, surgical site infection, or hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS for MVD have similar short-term outcomes compared to MS. This adds value to the use of minimally invasive methods for multivalvular surgery, despite conferring longer operative times. However, the paucity in literature and learning curve associated with MIS warrants further evidence, ideally randomized control trials, to support these findings.

The Right Anterior Thoracotomy Approach to Resect a Cardiac Papillary Fibroelastoma of the Aortic Valve

A cardiac papillary fibroelastoma (CPFE) is reported to be the second most common cardiac neoplasm after myxoma cordis. CPFEs are histologically benign, frequently asymptomatic, but highly thrombogenic, which could lead to systemic and peripheral embolization. We present a case of a 68-year-old-patient, with a history of angioosteohypertrophy syndrome, who presented at our emergency department (ED) with symptoms of transient ischemic attacks. A thorough investigation, including echocardiography, revealed a neoplasm on the left coronary cusp (LCC) of the aortic valve. The neoplasm was resected via a valve-sparing shave via the right anterior thoracotomy (RAT). The pathological assessment confirmed it to be CPFE. CPFE is a rare but treatable cause of thromboembolism. The removal of CPFEs has classically been performed through a full median sternotomy. We like to present the first case of a valve-sparing removal of a CPFE on the aortic valve through a RAT approach.

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.

Early Clinical Experiences of Robotic Assisted Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Valve Stenosis with Sutureless Aortic Valve

Robotic assisted aortic valve surgery is still challenging and debatable. We retrospectively reviewed our cases of robotic assisted aortic valve replacement utilizing sutureless aortic valve with following surgical technique: 3 ports, 1 for endoscope and 2 for the robotic arms were inserted in the right chest and da Vinci Si robotic system (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) was adapted to these ports. Cardiopulmonary bypass was initiated through peripheral cannulations. A vent cannula was placed through the right superior pulmonary vein and a cardioplegia cannula in the ascending aorta. After cardioplegic arrest following aortic cross-clamp, the aortic valve was exposed through a clam shell aortotomy. Valvectomy along with decalcification was performed. Next using 3 guiding sutures the Perceval S valve (LivaNova, London, UK) was parachuted down and deployed. After confirming valve position, the aortotomy was closed. There were no major complications during the procedures and no conversion to sternotomy. Exposure of aortic valve was of high quality. Valvectomy required assistance with long scissors by the bedside surgeon for excision of the severely calcified valve cusps and effective decalcification of annulus. Postoperative convalescence was uncomplicated except for postoperative atrial fibrillation in 1 patient. Robotic assistance in aortic valve procedure enabled excellent exposure of the aortic valve and improved manipulation and suturing of the aortic annulus and aorta. There needs to be improvement of instrumentation for valve debridement and removal of calcium from the annulus. In addition, the sutureless valve technology contributes to the feasibility and the efficacy of this procedure.

Rescue Balloon Aortic Valvuloplasty After Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement for Severe Paravalvular Leak

Sutureless aortic valve replacement (AVR) is a wide-spreading new technology that provides short clamping time and excellent hemodynamic outcomes. However, among its possible complications is the risk of paravalvular leak. We present the case of a 63-year-old woman who underwent minimally invasive right mini-thoracotomy AVR) with Perceval S sutureless valve (LivaNova, London, UK). Intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography revealed severe paravalvular leak with stent distortion. Rescue balloon valvuloplasty was performed through the right femoral artery, and resulted in the resolution of the paravalvular leak. This case illustrates the utility and feasibility of balloon valvuloplasty in trouble-shooting sutureless aortic valve stent distortion, thus avoiding a repeat aortic cross-clamp and valve replacement.

Aortic valve approaches in the era of minimally invasive cardiac surgery

The concept of minimally invasive cardiac surgery has been gradually adopted world-wide since its inception more than 2 decades ago. Recently, catheter intervention has been used in the treatment of structural heart disease. Most notably, minimally invasive transcatheter aortic valve implantation is now an established treatment option for aortic valve stenosis. There are three major approaches for minimally invasive aortic valve surgery: via median sternotomy, via the parasternal approach, and via the thoracotomy approach. All these approaches allow for a small skin incision and/or avoid full sternotomy. Moreover, several advanced variations with additional aortic procedures or totally endoscopic management have been developed. When considering each approach, low invasiveness must be balanced with safety, as surgeons broaden their insight of advanced medicine. Physical invasiveness is largely related to the surgical approach in minimally invasive surgery. We review the history and evolution of the different surgical approaches for minimally invasive aortic valve replacement.

Recent advances in aortic valve replacement

Aortic valve replacement has stood the test of time but is no longer an operation that is exclusively approached through a median sternotomy using only sutured prostheses. Currently, surgical aortic valve replacement can be performed through a number of minimally invasive approaches employing conventional mechanical or bioprostheses as well as sutureless valves. In either case, the direct surgical access allows inspection of the valve, complete excision of the diseased leaflets, and debridement of the annulus in a controlled and thorough manner under visual control. It can be employed to treat aortic valve pathologies of all natures and aetiologies. When compared with transcatheter valves in patients with a high or intermediate preoperative predictive risk, conventional surgery has not been shown to be inferior to transcatheter valve implants. As our understanding of sutureless valves and their applicability to minimally invasive surgery advances, the invasiveness and trauma of surgery can be reduced and outcomes can improve. This warrants further comparative trials comparing sutureless and transcatheter valves.

Right Anterior Minithoracotomy for Aortic Valve Replacement: A Widely Applicable, Simple, and Stepwise Approach

Objective

A stepwise approach for right anterior minithoracotomy aortic valve replacement (RAT-AVR), without sutureless valves, special instruments, or preoperative imaging, was developed. We report our experience with this widely applicable, simplified approach.

Methods

Patients with a history of previous chest surgery, documented PVD, severe COPD, LVOT size <2.0 cm, and root size <2.8 cm were excluded. Chest CT was not mandatory. The stepwise surgical approach consists of 1) tolerability of single-lung ventilation; 2) 5-cm long incision on third right anterior ICS; 3) small pericardial opening to localize the aortic valve annular plane by digital palpation; 4) shingling of the correct rib to create a box field; 5) optimizing exposure with stay sutures; 6) femoral or central cannulation with right superior pulmonary vein venting and usual antegrade cardioplegia; 7) performing a standard AVR without adjunct instruments; and 8) reconstructing 1 costochondral cartilage.

Results

Fifty-five patients were operated. The mean age was 68.5 years (SD 10.4); 29.1% were female. Median STS PROM was 1.18 (0.4 to 6.6). Pump and cross-clamp times were 104.8 minutes (SD 27.9) and 73.2 minutes (SD 22.8), respectively. There was no need for a knot pusher. There was 1 conversion, 1 reopening for bleeding, and 1 pacemaker insertion. No patient had a stroke, MI, or death at 30 days. The median LOS was 6 days (3 to 19).

Conclusion

RAT-AVR can be applicable and performed safely in a wide range of patients by adopting a simple, stepwise approach with intraoperative assessment, without the need for special imaging, instrumentation, or advanced training.

Improved operative and recovery times with mini-thoracotomy aortic valve replacement

Background

The small incisions of minimally invasive surgery have the proposed benefit of less surgical trauma, less pain, and faster recovery. This study was done to compare minimally invasive techniques for aortic valve replacement, including right anterior mini-thoracotomy and mini-sternotomy, to conventional sternotomy.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 503 patients who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement at our institution from 2012 to 2015 using one of three techniques: 1) Mini-thoracotomy, 2) Mini-sternotomy, 3) Conventional sternotomy. Demographics, operative morbidity, mortality, and postoperative complications were compared.

Results

Of the 503 cases, 267 (53.1%) were mini-thoracotomy, 120 (23.8%) were mini-sternotomy, and 116 (23.1%) were conventional sternotomy. Mini-thoracotomy patients, compared to mini-sternotomy and conventional sternotomy, had significantly shorter bypass times [82 (IQ 67–113) minutes; vs. 117 (93.5–139.5); vs. 102.5 (85.5–132.5), respectively (p < 0.0001)], a lower incidence of prolonged ventilator support [3.75% vs. 9.17 and 12.9%, respectively (p = 0.0034)], and required significantly shorter ICU and postoperative stays, resulting in an overall shorter hospitalization [6 (IQ 5–9) days; vs. 7 (5–14.5); vs 9 (6–15.5), respectively (p < 0.05)]. Incidence of other postoperative complications were lower in the mini-thoracotomy group compared to mini-sternotomy and conventional sternotomy, without significance. Minimally invasive techniques trended towards better survival [mini-thoracotomy 1.5%, mini-sternotomy 1.67%, and conventional sternotomy 5.17% (p = 0.13)].

Conclusions

Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement approaches are safe, effective alternatives to conventional sternotomy. The mini-thoracotomy approach showed decreased operative times, decreased lengths of stay, decreased incidence of prolonged ventilator time, and a trend towards lower mortality when compared to mini-sternotomy and conventional sternotomy.

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.

Cell salvage processing of residual cardiopulmonary bypass volume in minimally invasive cardiac surgery

Several reports demonstrated positive effects of processing residual cardiopulmonary bypass volume using a cell salvage device in conventional open heart surgery via sternotomy on hemostasis. The present study aimed to investigate whether cell salvage processing has the same effects on postoperative blood loss and transfusion in minimally invasive cardiac surgery. Between July 2015 and April 2018, 80 consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive aortic valve replacement via right anterolateral minithoracotomy were enrolled in the present study. Perioperative outcomes and coagulation data of 40 patients who were retransfused with processed cardiopulmonary bypass volumes were compared with those of 40 patients receiving unprocessed residual blood (control group). Postoperative blood loss in patients receiving processed residual blood was significantly less than that in the control group at 6 h (115 ± 50 vs. 73 ± 33 ml, p < 0.001) and 12 h (167 ± 70 vs. 125 ± 67 ml, p = 0.009) after surgery, and the rate of fresh frozen plasma use after surgery was significantly reduced in patients receiving processed residual blood (18 vs. 0%, p = 0.012). In conclusion, processing of residual cardiopulmonary bypass volume reduced postoperative blood loss and postoperative use of fresh frozen plasma and could be useful for hemostasis in minimally invasive cardiac surgery.