Percutaneous cannulation for cardiopulmonary bypass in robotic mitral valve surgery with zero groin complications

Biochemical implications of robotic surgery: a new frontier in the operating room

Robotic surgery represents a milestone in surgical procedures, offering advantages such as less invasive methods, elimination of tremors, scaled motion, and 3D visualization. This in-depth analysis explores the complex biochemical effects of robotic methods. The use of pneumoperitoneum and steep Trendelenburg positioning can decrease pulmonary compliance and splanchnic perfusion while increasing hypercarbia. However, robotic surgery reduces surgical stress and inflammation by minimizing tissue trauma. This contributes to faster recovery but may limit immune function. Robotic procedures also limit ischemia-reperfusion injury and oxidative damage compared to open surgery. They also help preserve native antioxidant defenses and coagulation. In a clinical setting, robotic procedures reduce blood loss, pain, complications, and length of stay compared to traditional procedures. However, risks remain, including device failure, the need for conversion to open surgery and increased costs. On the oncology side, there is still debate about margins, recurrence, and long-term survival. The advent of advanced technologies, such as intraoperative biosensors, localized drug delivery systems, and the incorporation of artificial intelligence, may further improve the efficiency of robotic surgery. However, ethical dilemmas regarding patient consent, privacy, access, and regulation of this disruptive innovation need to be addressed. Overall, this review sheds light on the complex biochemical implications of robotic surgery and highlights areas that require additional mechanistic investigation. It presents a comprehensive approach to responsibly maximize the potential of robotic surgery to improve patient outcomes, integrating technical skill with careful consideration of physiological and ethical issues.

Concomitant Tricuspid Valve Surgery Is Not Associated With Increased Operative Risk During Robotic Mitral Valve Surgery

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of robotic mitral valve surgery with and without concomitant tricuspid valve surgery.

METHODS

Patients who underwent robotic mitral surgery between March 2010 and September 2022 were included. Patients were grouped according to the presence of concomitant tricuspid interventions. The groups were compared for baseline factors, operative parameters, and early postoperative outcomes. Age- and gender-matched groups were also compared for outcomes.

RESULTS

The study included 285 robotic mitral surgery patients. There were 59 patients who underwent concomitant tricuspid interventions. In the concomitant tricuspid surgery group, cardiopulmonary bypass time (150.1 vs 128.4 min, P < 0.001) and cross-clamp time (99.2 vs 82.4 min, P < 0.001) were longer. Prolonged intubation was more frequent in the concomitant tricuspid intervention group (5.2% vs 0.5%, P = 0.029). The groups did not differ in terms of mortality, permanent pacemaker (PPM) requirement, or other morbidities. Perioperative outcomes were similar after matched group analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Operative mortality and early adverse outcomes did not increase with the addition of tricuspid intervention in our cohort of robotic mitral surgery patients. The robotic approach for mitral disease and coexisting tricuspid disease may offer safe results without an increased risk of postoperative PPM requirement.

Robotic-assisted mitral valve surgery without aortic cross-clamping: a safe and feasible technique

Background

The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of robotic-assisted mitral valve surgery without aortic cross-clamping.

Methods

From January 2010 to September 2022, 28 patients underwent robotic-assisted mitral valve surgery without aortic cross-clamping in our center using DaVinci Robotic Systems. Clinical data during the perioperative period and early outcomes of the patients were recorded.

Results

Most patients were in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II and III. Mean age and EuroScore II of the patients were 71.5 ± 13.5 and 8.4 ± 3.7 respectively. The patients underwent either mitral valve replacement (n = 16, 57.1%) or mitral valve repair (n = 12, 42.9%). Concomitant procedures were performed including tricuspid valve repair, tricuspid valve replacement, PFO closure, left atrial appendage ligation, left atrial appendage thrombectomy and cryoablation for atrial fibrillation. Mean CPB times were 140.9 ± 44.6 and mean fibrillatory arrest duration was 76.6 ± 18.4. Mean duration of ICU stay was 32.5 ± 28.8 h and mean duration of hospital stay 9.8 ± 8.3 days. One patient (3.6%) underwent revision due to bleeding. New onset renal failure was observed in one (3.6%) patient and postoperative stroke in one (3.6%) patient. Postoperative early mortality was observed in two (7.1%) patients.

Conclusions

Robotic-assisted mitral valve surgery without cross-clamping is a safe and feasible technique in high-risk patients undergoing redo mitral surgery with severe adhesions as well as in primary mitral valve cases that are complicated with ascending aortic calcification.

Cardiopulmonary Bypass Emergencies and Intraoperative Issues

Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) is a complex biomechanical engineering undertaking and an essential component of cardiac surgery. However, similar to all complex bioengineering systems, CPB activities are prone to a variety of safety and biomechanical issues. In this narrative review article, the authors discuss the preventative and intraoperative management strategies for a number of intraoperative CPB emergencies, including cannulation complications (dissection, malposition, gas embolism), CPB equipment issues (heater-cooler failure, oxygenator issues, electrical failure, and tubing rupture), CPB circuit thrombosis, medication issues, awareness during CPB, and CPB issues during transcatheter aortic valve replacement.