Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery: evolution, techniques and outcomes

Minimal-Invasive Mitral Valve Repair after Breast Augmentation

Minimal-invasive mitral valve surgery after breast augmentation is an ongoing interdisciplinary challenge. Notably, the perioperative explantation of the breast implant, as reported in most cases, is of questionable benefit. We herein report on successful minimal-invasive mitral valve repair after subpectoral breast augmentation with perioperative preservation of the breast implant in situ.

Initial Experience of Minimally Invasive Concomitant Aortic and Mitral Valve Replacement/Repair at a Tertiary Care Cardiac Centre of a Developing Country

Introduction

Minimally invasive double valve replacement (DVR) surgery through a small transverse anterior thoracotomy is an alternate technique to sternotomy for concomitant aortic and mitral valve (AVR, MVR) surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the in-hospital and early outcomes of direct vision minimal invasive double valve surgery (DVMI-DVR) at a tertiary care cardiac center of a developing country.

Methods

This study was conducted at the National Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases Karachi, Pakistan from January 2018 to September 2018. Nineteen consecutive patients undergoing DVMI-DVR for aortic and mitral disease without any prior cardiac surgery were included in this study. For all procedures, access was obtained through small transverse anterior thoracotomy incision with wedge resection (Chaudhry’s Wedge) of sternum opposite to the third and fourth costosternal joints. Patients were observed during their hospital stay and the following variables were observed the length of hospital stay (LOHS), ventilator support, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, pain score, and mortality. The pain score was assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS).

Results

The male/female ratio was 11:8 with a mean age of 35 ± 12 years with mean EuroSCORE of 6.6 ± 3.5%. The mean total bypass time was 129.8 ± 23.83 min (range: 98-181 minutes). The mean mechanical ventilation time was 3.16 ± 1.12 hours (range: 2-6 hours). The mean intensive care unit (ICU) stay was 41.84 ± 8.36 hours. The mean post-operative LOHS was 5.63 ± 1.12 days (range: 4-8 days). We had zero frequency of wound infection and surgical mortality. The mean pain score was 4.32 (on a predefined pain scale of one to nine with a high value indicating severe pain).

Conclusion

Minimally invasive DVR surgery is a safe and reproducible technique with comparable outcomes such as postoperative pain score (4.32 ± 2.05), ventilation time (3.16 ± 1.12 hours), ICU stay (41.84 ± 8.36 hours), and hospital stay (5.63 ± 1.12 days). In terms of mortality, operative times, ICU stay, and hospital stay, the minimally invasive DVR is at least comparable to those achieved with median sternotomy. Further prospective randomized studies are needed to validate our findings.

Minimally invasive versus sternotomy approach for mitral valve surgery in patients greater than 70 years old: a propensity-matched comparison

BACKGROUND

The goal of this study was to compare the outcome after mitral valve surgery through either standard sternotomy or right lateral minithoracotomy in elderly patients with higher perioperative risk.

METHODS

All 1,027 elderly patients (>70 years) who received isolated mitral valve surgery (± tricuspid valve repair) between August 1999 and July 2009 were analyzed for outcome differences due to surgical approach using propensity score matching. The etiology of mitral valve disease was degenerative (83%), endocarditis (6%), rheumatic (10%), and acute ischemic (<1%). Isolated stenosis was rare (3%); most patients had mitral valve regurgitation (72%) or combined mitral valve disease (25%).

RESULTS

The minimally invasive approach led to longer duration of surgery (186 ± 61 vs 169 ± 59 minutes, p = 0.01), cardiopulmonary bypass time (142 ± 54 vs 102 ± 45 minutes, p = 0.0001), and cross-clamp time (74 ± 44 vs 64 ± 28 minutes, p = 0.015). There were no differences between the matched groups in 30-day mortality (7.7% vs 6.3%, p = 0.82), combined major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (11.2% vs 12.6%, p = 0.86), or other postoperative outcome. Only the number of postoperative arrhythmias and pacemaker implants was higher in the sternotomy group (65.7% vs 50.3%, p = 0.023 and 18.9% vs 10.5%, p = 0.059). Long-term survival was 66% ± 5.6% vs 56 ± 5.5% at 5 years and 35% ± 12% vs 40% ± 7.9% at 8 years, and did not show significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery through a right lateral minithoracotomy is at least as good and safe as the standard sternotomy approach in elderly patients.

Cardiac surgery and acute kidney injury: emerging concepts

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review recent advances in understanding of the occurrence, pathophysiology, prophylaxis and treatment of cardiac surgery-associated acute kidney injury (AKI).

RECENT FINDINGS

New definitions and prompt diagnostic tools, enhanced risk stratification strategies, avoidance of nephrotoxins and procedure selection are all areas in which recent contributions to the literature have improved perioperative care for cardiac surgery patients. Although evidence continues to confirm the adverse effects of extreme hemodilution and transfusion as part of cardiac surgery, the previously believed advantages of tight perioperative glucose control for the kidney are being questioned in recent studies. Although very little evidence from randomized trials in cardiac surgery populations supports specific interventions to protect or prevent AKI, recent reports indicate reduced AKI associated with some procedural innovations, and the hope that promising findings for agents such as sodium bicarbonate that require further study may yield effective therapies.

SUMMARY

The vexing problem of AKI following cardiac surgery is common and unsolved. Clinical strategies that stress avoidance rather than treatment remain the mainstay of effective management of patients at high renal risk.