Impact of Pleural Integrity Preservation After Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Surgery

OBJECTIVE

While the benefits of minimally invasive aortic valve surgery compared with standard sternotomy have been widely described, the impact of preservation of pleural integrity (PPI) in minimally invasive surgery is still widely discussed. This study aims to define the role of PPI on postoperative and long-term outcomes after minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MIAVR).

METHODS

All 2,430 consecutive patients undergoing MIAVR (ministernotomy or right anterior minithoracotomy) between 1997 and 2022 were included in the study. Patients were divided into 2 groups: patients with and without PPI. PPI was considered the maintenance of the pleura closed without the need for a chest tube insertion at the end of the surgical procedure. A propensity-matched analysis was used to compare the PPI and not-PPI groups.

RESULTS

After propensity matching, 848 patients were included in each group (PPI and not-PPI). The mean age was 70.21 versus 71.42 years, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality was 0.31% versus 0.30% in not-PPI versus PPI, respectively. The mean follow-up time was 147.4 months. Postoperatively, not-PPI versus PPI patients had a longer intensive care unit stay (9.7 vs 17.3 h, P < 0.001) and hospital length of stay (5.2 vs 8.9 days, P < 0.001). The rate of respiratory complications including the incidence of pneumothorax or subcutaneous emphysema, pulmonary atelectasis, and pleural effusion events requiring thoracentesis/drainage was significantly higher in not-PPI versus PPI. The 30-day all-cause mortality was higher in not-PPI versus PPI (0.029 vs 0.010, P = 0.003). Perioperative, short-term, and long-term all-cause mortality was significantly higher in the not-PPI group.

CONCLUSIONS

PPI after MIAVR is associated with reduced incidence of postoperative complications, reduced lengths of stay, and improved overall survival compared with not-PPI. Therefore, a MIAVR tailored patient-procedure approach to maintaining the pleura integrity positively impacts short-term and long-term outcomes.

Ministernotomy compared with right anterior minithoracotomy for aortic valve surgery

OBJECTIVES

Ministernotomy and right anterior minithoracotomy are the 2 main techniques applied for minimally invasive aortic valve replacement. The goal of this study is to compare early and long-term outcomes of both techniques.

METHODS

The data of 2419 patients undergoing isolated minimally invasive aortic valve replacement between 1999 and 2019 were prospectively collected. Retrospectively, patients were divided into the ministernotomy group (n = 1352) and the minithoracotomy group (n = 1067).

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 986 patients remained in each group. Operation time and rate of conversion to full sternotomy were significantly higher in the minithoracotomy group than in the ministernotomy group (184.6 ± 45.2 vs 241.3 ± 68.6, relative risk, 2.54, P = .005 and .09 vs .23, relative risk, 1.45, P = .013, respectively). The 30-day mortality, excluding cardiac death, was lower in the ministernotomy group than in the minithoracotomy group (0.012 vs 0.028, relative risk, 1.41, P = .011, respectively); the intensive care unit length of stay (12.4 vs 16.5, relative risk, 1.62, P = .037, respectively) and hospital length of stay (5.4 vs 8.7, relative risk, 1.74 P = .028, respectively) were significantly longer in the minithoracotomy group. The minithoracotomy surgical approach was the strongest independent predictor of early mortality (odds ratio, 4.24 [1.67-7.35], P = .002). The actuarial survival by Kaplan-Meier analysis at 1, 3, 5, 10, and 20 years was significantly better in the ministernotomy group than in the minithoracotomy group (P = .0001). Actuarial freedom from reoperation at 5 years was 97.3% ± 4.4% in the ministernotomy group versus 95.8% ± 5.2% in the minithoracotomy group (P = .087).

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement using ministernotomy is associated with reduced operative time, intensive care unit stay, hospital length of stay, and postoperative morbidities and incisional pain, and improves early and long-term mortality.

A Decision-Support Informatics Platform for Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement

Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement is performed by mini-sternotomy (MS) or less invasive right anterior mini-thoracotomy (RT). The possibility of adopting RT is assessed by anatomical criteria derived from manual 2D image analysis. We developed a semi-automatic tool (RT-PLAN) to assess the criteria of RT, extract other parameters of surgical interest and generate a view of the anatomical region in a 3D space. Twenty-five 3D CT images from a dataset were retrospectively evaluated. The methodology starts with segmentation to reconstruct 3D surface models of the aorta and anterior rib cage. Secondly, the RT criteria and geometric information from these models are automatically and quantitatively evaluated. A comparison is made between the values of the parameters measured by the standard manual 2D procedure and our tool. The RT-PLAN procedure was feasible in all cases. Strong agreement was found between RT-PLAN and the standard manual 2D procedure. There was no difference between the RT-PLAN and the standard procedure when selecting patients for the RT technique. The tool developed is able to effectively perform the assessment of the RT criteria, with the addition of a realistic visualisation of the surgical field through virtual reality technology.

Anesthesia for minimally invasive cardiac surgery

Due to its potential benefits and increased patient satisfaction minimal invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) is rapidly gaining in popularity. These procedures are not without challenges and require careful planning, pre-operative patient assessment and excellent intraoperative communication. Assessment of patient suitability for MICS by a multi-disciplinary team during pre-operative workup is desirable. MICS requires additional skills that many might not consider to be part of the standard cardiac anesthetic toolkit. Anesthetists involved in MICS need not only be highly skilled in performing transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) but need to be proficient in multimodal analgesia, including locoregional or neuroaxial techniques. MICS procedures tend to cause more postoperative pain than standard median sternotomies do, and patients need analgesic management more in keeping with thoracic operations. Ultrasound guided peripheral regional anesthesia techniques like serratus anterior block can offer an advantage over neuroaxial techniques in patients on anti-platelet therapy or anticoagulation with low molecular weight or unfractionated heparin The article reviews the salient points pertaining to pre-operative assessment and suitability, intraoperative process and postoperative management of minimally invasive cardiac procedures in the operating theatre as well as the catheterization lab. Special emphasis is given to anesthetic management and analgesia techniques.

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.

Aortic Valve Replacement: Treatment by Sternotomy versus Minimally Invasive Approach

Objective

To compare the results of aortic valve replacement with access by sternotomy or minimally invasive approach.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of medical records of 37 patients undergoing aortic valve replacement by sternotomy or minimally invasive approach, with emphasis on the comparison of time of cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic clamping, volume of surgical bleeding, time of mechanical ventilation, need for blood transfusion, incidence of atrial fibrillation, length of stay in intensive care unit, time of hospital discharge, short-term mortality and presence of surgical wound infection.

Results

Sternotomy was used in 22 patients and minimally invasive surgery in 15 patients. The minimally invasive approach had significantly higher time values of cardiopulmonary bypass (114.3±23.9 versus 86.7±19.8min.; P=0.003), aortic clamping (87.4±19.2 versus 61.4±12.9 min.; P<0.001) and mechanical ventilation (287.3±138.9 versus 153.9±118.6 min.; P=0.003). No difference was found in outcomes surgical bleeding volume, need for blood transfusion, incidence of atrial fibrillation, length of stay in intensive care unit and time of hospital discharge. No cases of short-term mortality or surgical wound infection were documented.

Conclusion

The less invasive approach presented with longer times of cardiopulmonary bypass, aortic clamping and mechanical ventilation than sternotomy, however without prejudice to the length of stay in intensive care unit, time of hospital discharge and morbidity.

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

OBJECTIVES

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

DESIGN

Case series.

SETTING

University-affiliated private hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients undergoing MIAVR.

INTERVENTIONS

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

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement

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

Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement: 12-year single center experience

BACKGROUND

This study reports the single center experience on minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MIAVR), performed through a right anterior minithoracotomy or ministernotomy (MS).

METHODS

Eight hundred and fifty-three patients, who underwent MIAVR from 2002 to 2014, were retrospectively analyzed. Survival was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The Cox multivariable proportional hazards regression model was developed to identify independent predictors of follow-up mortality.

RESULTS

Median age was 73.8, and 405 (47.5%) of patients were female. The overall 30-day mortality was 1.9%. Four hundred and forty-three (51.9%) and 368 (43.1%) patients received biological and sutureless prostheses, respectively. Median cardiopulmonary bypass time and aortic cross-clamping time were 108 and 75 minutes, respectively. Nineteen (2.2%) cases required conversion to full median sternotomy. Thirty-seven (4.3%) patients required re-exploration for bleeding. Perioperative stroke occurred in 15 (1.8%) patients, while transient ischemic attack occurred postoperative in 11 (1.3%). New onset atrial fibrillation was reported for 243 (28.5%) patients. After a median follow-up of 29.1 months (2,676.0 patient-years), survival rates at 1 and 5 years were 96%±1% and 80%±3%, respectively. Cox multivariable analysis showed that advanced age, history of cardiac arrhythmia, preoperative chronic renal failure, MS approach, prolonged mechanical ventilation and hospital stay as well as wound revision were associated with higher mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

MIAVR via both approaches is safe and feasible with excellent outcomes, and is associated with low conversion rate and low perioperative morbidity. Long term survival is at least comparable to that reported for conventional sternotomy AVR.

Minimally invasive valve surgery

Cardiac valve surgery is life saving for many patients. The advent of minimally invasive surgical techniques has historically allowed for improvement in both postoperative convalescence and important clinical outcomes. The development of minimally invasive cardiac valve repair and replacement surgery over the past decade is poised to revolutionize the care of cardiac valve patients. Here, we present a review of the history and current trends in minimally invasive aortic and mitral valve repair and replacement, including the development of sutureless bioprosthetic valves.