Redo mitral valve operation via right minithoracotomy--"no touch" technique

Minimally Invasive Strategy to Repair Mitral Valve after Repeated Coronary Revascularization: A Case Report and Literature Review

Redo cardiac surgery after Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (CABG) is burdened by high morbidity and mortality, either intraoperatively and postoperatively, with the repeated sternotomy playing a crucial role as risk factor. The right minithoracotomy approach guarantees a safer control on conduits integrity and the right ventricular wall and a low impact on the respiratory mechanics. Herein, we report a patient who previously underwent two CABG (coronary artery bypass grafting) procedures and who was admitted to the hospital with a picture of heart failure caused by a severe mitral regurgitation. He was successfully submitted to a mitral valve repair on a beating heart via the right minithoracotomy approach.

Minimally Invasive Beating Heart Mitral Valve Repair in a Patient With Connective Tissue Disease at Prohibitive Risk for Redo Sternotomy

Sternal reentry when the ascending aorta is adherent to the posterior table of the sternum is associated with substantial risk. A minimally invasive right thoracotomy beating heart approach is an alternative when the aorta cannot be cross-clamped. This report details this technique for a complex reoperative mitral valve repair procedure performed in a patient with connective tissue disease who had required multiple aortic operations and presented with heart failure and severe functional mitral regurgitation.

Long-term outcomes of a totally thoracoscopic approach for reoperative mitral valve replacement: a propensity score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to summarize the perioperative and long-term outcomes of patients with previous mitral valve surgery (MVS) undergoing reoperative mitral valve replacement (MVR).

METHODS

Data for all reoperative mitral valve replacements (re-MVRs) with or without concomitant tricuspid surgery were analyzed from Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital between January 2013 and December 2019. Propensity score matching resulted in 30 matched pairs with improved balance after matching in baseline covariates. Perioperative data and long-term clinical outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Results are based on the matched cohorts between the two groups. The in-hospital mortality was 3.3% (two deaths) in the entire cohort and was not significantly different between the median sternotomy (MS) group and the totally thoracoscopic (TT) group. Most patients in the TT group had their tracheal intubation removed within 24 hours of surgery. The TT group had a diminished requirement for blood transfusion and a reduced 4-day postoperative chest tube drainage amount. The incidence of early major complications, including all-cause death and reoperation due to bleeding, was lower in the TT group. No significant differences were observed in the 7-year survival probability between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The encouraging results regarding the perioperative and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent a TT re-MVR show that this approach is particularly beneficial for patients requiring reoperation.

Contemporary Reoperative Mitral Valve Surgery: Technical Considerations and Clinical Outcomes

As patients with cardiac disease live longer, reoperative mitral valve surgery has become more common. Although these operations are technically challenging and of high risk, outcomes continue to improve. Minimally invasive techniques, better cardioprotective strategies, and advanced perioperative care have contributed to this. In this review, we discuss surgical approaches, intraoperative strategies, novel catheter-directed devices, and clinical outcomes of contemporary reoperative mitral valve surgery.

Minimally invasive beating heart technique for mitral valve surgery in patients with previous sternotomy and giant left ventricle

PURPOSE

To analyze the efficacy of minimally invasive beating heart technique for mitral valve surgery in the cardiac patients with previous sternotomy and giant left ventricle.

METHODS

Eighty cardiac patients with previous sternotomy and giant left ventricle according to the diagnostic criteria that left ventricular end diastolic diameter (LVEDD) was ≥70 mm, who underwent mitral valve surgery at our center from January 2006 to January 2019 were analyzed. We divided all patients into minimally invasive beating heart technique group (n = 30) and conventional median resternotomy arrested heart technique group (n = 50) according to the surgical methods. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were compared between two groups.

RESULTS

Minimally invasive beating heart technique compared to the conventional median resternotomy arrested heart technique for mitral valve surgery in the cardiac patients with previous sternotomy and giant left ventricle had significant differences in operation time(P = 0.002), cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time(P < 0.001), intraoperative blood loss(P < 0.001), postoperative transfusion ratio(P = 0.01), postoperative transfusion amount(P < 0.001), postoperative drainage volume(P = 0.001), extubation time(P = 0.04), intensive care unit (ICU) stay time(P = 0.04) and postoperative hospital stay time(P < 0.001), but no significant differences in re-exploration for bleeding, postoperative 30-day mortality, postoperative complications and 6 months postoperative echocardiographic parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the method of minimally invasive beating heart technique for mitral valve surgery in the cardiac patients with previous sternotomy and giant left ventricle is effective and reliable, meanwhile reduce the operation time and CPB time, decrease the transfusion ratio and transfusion amount, shorten postoperative ICU stay and hospital stay time, promote the early extubation so that accelerate the patients' early recovery. All of these show a benefit of minimally invasive beating heart technique compared to conventional median resternotomy arrested heart technique.

The Opportunities and Limitations of Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery

BACKGROUND

Over the past two decades, minimally invasive techniques for classic heart valve surgery and isolated bypass surgery have been developed that enable access to the heart via partial sternotomy for most aortic valve procedures and via sternotomy-free mini-thoracotomy for other procedures.

METHODS

We review the current evidence on minimally invasive cardiac surgery on the basis of pertinent randomized studies and database studies retrieved by a selective search in the MEDLINE and PubMed Central databases, as well as by the Google Scholar search engine.

RESULTS

A PubMed search employing the search term "minimally invasive cardiac surgery" yielded nearly 10 000 hits, among which there were 7 prospective, randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) on aortic valve replacement, with a total of 477 patients, and 3 RCTs on mitral valve surgery, with a total of 340 patients. Only limited reports of specified centers are currently available for multiple valvular procedures and multiple coronary artery bypass procedures. The RCTs reveal that the minimally invasive techniques are associated with fewer wound infections and faster mobilization, without any difference in survival. Minimally invasive procedures are technically demanding and have certain anatomical prerequisites, such as appropriate coronary morphology for multiple bypass operations and the position of the aorta in the chest for sternotomy-free aortic valve procedures. The articles reviewed here were presumably affected by selection bias, in that patients in the published studies were preselected, and there may have been negative studies that were not published at all.

CONCLUSION

Specialized surgeons and centers can now carry out many cardiac valvular and bypass operations via minithoracotomy rather than sternotomy. According to current evidence, these minimally invasive techniques yield results that are at least as good as classic open-heart surgery.

Right mini-thoracotomy approach reduces hospital stay and transfusion of mitral or tricuspid valve reoperation with non-inferior efficacy: evidence from propensity-matched study

Background

There is limited evidence about the efficacy and cost difference between minimally invasive and conventional valve reoperation. This study intended to compare the short-term efficacy and cost between right mini-thoracotomy approach and median sternotomy approach in valve reoperation.

Methods

From Feb 2011 to Sep 2017, 156 patients underwent valve reoperation including 68 cases of minimally invasive approach and 88 cases of traditional median sternotomy approach in our hospital. A propensity scoring was used to match patients with similar demographic characteristics. A total of 42 pairs of patients were left and divided into the conventional sternotomy group (CS group) and the right mini-thoracotomy group (RT group). A retrospective study of efficacy and cost was conducted between two groups.

Results

There was no statistical difference between two groups in demographical characteristics after propensity-scoring match (P>0.05). In-hospital mortality was 11.9% (5/42) for CS group and 7.1% (3/42) for the RT group (P=0.687). No significant disparity was found in the incidence of complications between two groups (P>0.05). CPB time (P=0.012), bypass time (P=0.006) and operation time (P=0.003) of CS group were significantly higher than RT group. Blood loss (P=0.014) and transfusion volume (P=0.003) of RT group was less than CS group. Shorter ICU and hospital stay was seen in RT group compared with CS group (P<0.001). Though the materials cost of RT group was higher than CS group (P<0.001), no significant disparity was found in total cost between CS group and RT group (P=0.790).

Conclusions

The right mini-thoracotomy approach can achieve equivalent efficacy with conventional median approach, and doesn't necessarily increase the total cost. Moreover, the minimally invasive approach can decrease the operation time, hospital stay and blood product transfusion.

Single Femoral Venous Drainage Versus Both Vena Cava Drainage in Isolated Repeat Tricuspid Valve Surgery

To assess the potential advantages of minimally invasive surgery using a single femoral venous drainage method versus femoral venous and superior vena cava or jugular venous drainage method during repeat tricuspid valve surgery.From January 2010 to December 2016, 50 repeat tricuspid valve procedures were performed using a minimally invasive approach without aortic cross-clamping at our institution. The arterial cannula was inserted into the femoral artery, and at the same time, the venous cannula was placed in the femoral vein in 28 patients (FV group) during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). The venous cannula was inserted into the femoral vein and the superior vena cava or jugular vein in 22 patients (FSV group).Overall, 36 patients underwent tricuspid valve replacement (TVR) and 14 patients underwent tricuspid valvuloplasty (TVP). The CPB time and operation time, respectively, were 72.96 ± 25.90 minutes versus 78.59 ± 31.95 minutes (P = 0.495) and 170.75 ± 73.31 minutes versus 228.87 ± 61.45 minutes (P = 0.004) in the FV group versus the FVS group. There were no significant differences in the ventilator-assisted time, the first-day LVEF, and the intensive care unit (ICU) stay between the FV group and the FSV group.Both types of drainage were effective and could ensure safety during the operative procedure. The vacuum-assisted single femoral venous drainage method simplified the minimally invasive isolated repeat tricuspid valve surgical process more significantly and is the more appropriate choice.

Beating heart minimally invasive mitral valve surgery in patients with previous sternotomy: the operative technique and early outcomes

Objective

Reoperative mitral valve surgery is increasingly required and can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The beating heart minimally invasive mitral valve surgery has a proposed benefit in avoiding the risks of repeat sternotomy, with reducing the need for adhesiolysis and cardioplegia reperfusion injury. We describe our experience with such a technique in patients with previous sternotomy.

Methods

A retrospective study was performed and all patients undergoing surgery of mitral valve through a right limited thoracotomy without application of an aortic cross-clamp (beating heart) as a redo cardiac surgery between January 2006 and January 2015 were included (n=25). Perioperative data as well as the operative technique are presented.

Results

Six patients (24%) had two previous sternotomies and one (4%) had three previous sternotomies. Mitral valve repair was performed in 11 patients (44%). No patient required conversion to median sternotomy. Inotropic support beyond 4 hours after operation was required in seven patients (28%). Ventilation time was less than 12 hours in 14 patients (56%) with another six patients (24%) extubated within 24 hours after surgery. Postoperative course was complicated with cerebrovascular accident in two patients (8%). In-hospital mortality was 4% (n=1). There was no 30-day mortality after discharge.

Conclusions

Reoperative mitral valve surgery can be safely performed through a limited right thoracotomy approach on a beating heart while on full cardiopulmonary bypass. The technique can be associated with potentially shorter operation, shorter cardiopulmonary bypass and a less complicated recovery.

Two-Incision Totally Thoracoscopic Approach for Mitral Valve Replacement

Totally thoracosopic mitral valve replacement (MVR) has been applied to mitral stenosis for many years. Three working ports are usually necessary, among which the longest port ranges from 6 to 8 cm. This study aimed to determine the safety and feasibility of the two-incision totally thoracoscopic approach for MVR, with the longest incision of 3 cm.From January 2014 to February 2016, 90 patients with mitral valve stenosis were retrospectively analyzed. Thirty-six (40%) patients were included in the two-incision group and 54 patients were operated on using the sternotomy approach. Perioperative variables and postoperative 3-month follow-up data were analyzed.All patients underwent MVR. Tricuspid valvuloplasty was performed in 23 (25.5%) patients with the Kay technique. The mean total surgery time, cardiopulmonary bypass, and cross-clamp times were longer in the two-incision group (266 ± 42 versus 200 ± 38 minutes; 156 ± 23 versus 121 ± 21 minutes; 100 ± 17 versus 80 ± 17 minutes, respectively) (P < 0.05). The mean postoperative mechanical ventilation time was shorter in the two-incision group (8.6 ± 2.5 versus 11.2 ± 2.6 hours, respectively) (P < 0.05). The mean volume of blood drainage was less in the two-incision group (497 ± 120 versus 730 ± 198 mL, respectively) (P < 0.05). Reopening occurred in one (sternotomy group, 1.8%) patient. No deaths, perivalvular leakage, infectious endocarditis, atelectasis of the lungs, or moderate tricuspid regurgitation were found at the 3-month follow-up.The two-incision totally thoracoscopic approach for MVR is safe and feasible. Concomitant tricuspid valvuloplasty can be conveniently performed. However, further clinical data are needed in future studies.

Right anterolateral thoracotomy: an attractive alternative to repeat sternotomy for high-risk patients undergoing reoperative mitral and tricuspid valve surgery

Background

Reoperative cardiac valve surgery via sternotomy is associated with a substantial morbidity and mortality. This study evaluated the right anterolateral thoracotomy for high-risk patients undergoing mitral and tricuspid valve redo procedures.

Methods

Out of a series of 173 patients undergoing redo cardiac valve surgery, 24 patients were reoperative via the right anterolateral thoracotomy as the high-risk group on the basis of the proximity of the heart and great vessels to the sternum and the presence and location of patent bypass grafts.

Results

In all cases, sternotomy was avoided. The mitral valve and tricuspid valve were replaced in 4 and 19 patients and repaired in 1 and 2 patients, respectively. Moreover, left atrial folding was performed in 5 patients. Mortality was 8.3%. All other patients had uneventful outcomes and normal valve function at follow-up.

Conclusions

Reoperative cardiac valve surgery can be performed safely using the right anterolateral thoracotomy in high-risk patients. It offers enough exposure. It minimizes the need for cardiac dissection, and thus, the risk for injury. Avoiding a high-risk resternotomy increases patients comfort and safety of redo mitral and tricuspid valve surgery.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13019-017-0645-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Minimally invasive approach for redo mitral valve replacement: no aortic cross-clamping and no cardioplegia

A 75-year-old woman who had previously undergone a double valve replacement was admitted to Asan Medical Center because of severe bioprosthetic mitral valve dysfunction and tricuspid regurgitation. Under hypothermic fibrillatory arrest without aortic cross-clamping, minimally invasive mitral and tricuspid valve surgery was performed via a right minithoracotomy.

Beating heart mitral valve repair for a patient with previous coronary bypass: a case report and review of the literature

Mitral valve reoperation, through a median sternotomy, for a patient with patent coronary bypass grafts is technically challenging and carries higher postoperative morbidity and mortality than a primary operation. We present a case of mitral valve repair using a beating heart technique under normothermic cardiopulmonary bypass that was performed 3 years after a coronary artery bypass operation. A limited (10 cm) right thoracotomy was made and cardiopulmonary bypass was conducted using the ascending aortic and femoral venous cannulation. The left atrium was opened while beating was maintained. Triangular resection of the prolapsed portion of the posterior leaflet and ring annuloplasty were performed. Completeness of the repair was verified by direct visualization under beating condition and transesophageal echocardiogram. This technique is a safe and feasible option for a mitral valve reoperation that excludes re-sternotomy, extensive pericardial dissection and aortic clamping, thereby minimizes risks of bleeding, graft injury and myocardial damage.