Anesthetic challenges in minimally invasive cardiac surgery: Are we moving in a right direction?

Anaesthesia for Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery

Minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) has been used since the 1990s and encompasses a wide range of techniques that lack full sternotomy, including valve and coronary artery graft surgery as well as transcatheter procedures. Due to the potential benefits offered to patients by MICS, these procedures are becoming more common. Unique anaesthetic knowledge and skills are required to overcome the specific challenges presented by MICS, including mastery of transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) and the provision of thoracic regional analgesia. This review evaluates the relevance of MICS to the anaesthetist and discusses pre-operative assessment, the relevant adjustments to intra-operative conduct that are necessary for these techniques, as well as post-operative care and what is known about outcomes.

Endoaortic balloon occlusion versus transthoracic cross-clamp for totally endoscopic robotic mitral valve surgery: a retrospective cohort study

Endoaortic balloon occlusion (EABO) and transthoracic cross-clamping have been shown to have comparable safety profiles for aortic occlusion in minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS). However, few studies have focused exclusively on the totally endoscopic robotic approach. We sought to compare outcomes for patients undergoing totally endoscopic robotic mitral valve surgery with aortic occlusion via EABO and transthoracic clamping after a period where EABO was unavailable required us to use the transthoracic clamp. Retrospective review identified 113 patients who underwent robotic mitral valve surgery at our facility between 2019 and 2021 with EABO (n = 71) or transthoracic clamping (n = 42). Relevant data were extracted and compared. Preoperative characteristics were similar other than a higher rate of coronary artery disease [EABO: 69.0% (49/71) vs clamp: 45.2% (19/42), p = .02] and chronic lung disease [EABO: 38.0% (27/71) vs clamp: 9.5% (4/42), p < .01] in the EABO group. Median percutaneous cardiopulmonary bypass time, operative time, and cross-clamp time were comparable. Similar rates of postoperative bleeding complications were observed, and no aortic complications were observed. One patient in each group underwent conversion to an open approach. 30-day mortality and readmission rates were comparable. EABO and transthoracic clamp were associated with similar bleeding and aortic outcomes, and mortality and readmission rates were comparable at thirty days postoperatively. Our findings support the comparable safety of the two techniques, which is well documented in studies encompassing all MIMVS techniques, within the specific context of the totally endoscopic robotic approach.

Minimally invasive tricuspid valve surgery

Tricuspid valve disease carries a very unfavorable prognosis when medically treated. Despite that, surgical intervention is still underperformed for tricuspid valve disease due to the reported high morbidity and mortality from a sternotomy approach. This had led to a shift towards maximizing medical therapy for right ventricular failure and, as a result, a more significant delay in surgical referrals with surgical risks when patients are finally referred. Tricuspid valve patients usually have other co-morbidities resulting from their systemic venous congestion and low flow cardiac output. Minimally invasive tricuspid valve surgery provides less tissue injury and, as a result, less trauma during surgery. This provides a hope for both patients and treating doctors to be more open for providing this procedure with less complications. Isolated minimally invasive tricuspid valve surgery is still not performed as widely as expected. This can be partly due to the adverse outcomes historically labelled to tricuspid valve surgery or by the long journey of learning the surgical team would need to commit to with a minimal access approach. In this article we will review the perioperative pathway, and outcomes of isolated minimally invasive tricuspid valve surgery in the available English literature.

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.

MICS CABG: a single-center experience of the first 100 cases

PURPOSE

To study the learning curve and outcomes of the first 100 cases of minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) performed at our center.

METHODS

From January 2017 to November 2019, a total of 100 patients underwent CABG via left anterior thoracotomy approach. We have studied the operative times within the MICS CABG patients to analyze our learning curve. We also studied the postoperative outcomes and compared these with those of patients who underwent sternotomy during the same period.

RESULTS

The mean age was 59.33 ± 9.95 (range 37-82) years. The numbers of males and females were 72 and 28 respectively. The preoperative average ejection fraction (EF) was 51.08 ± 9.75%. All these patients underwent CABG via left thoracotomy approach, after satisfying the exclusion criteria. All patients received left internal mammary artery (LIMA) to left anterior descending (LAD) as a standard graft, with the radial artery and saphenous vein being the next alternative conduits. The average length of the incision was 6.06 ± 0.45 cm. Only 2 cases were done on pump. The average number of grafts per patient was 2.33 ± 0.92. The mean operative time was 132.40 ± 11.56 min. The mean duration of ventilation was 4.79 ± 1.90 h and average intensive care unit (ICU) stay was 2.62 ± 0.84 days. There was one conversion and no mortalities in our study. We had analyzed our operative times and noticed a significant reduction after the first 20 cases, which was our learning curve.

CONCLUSION

MICS CABG can be performed for multivessel disease with the same comfort as for a single or a double vessel disease, once the learning curve has been achieved. Only significant difference from the sternotomy approach was noted in the longer operative times for MICS CABG during the learning curve, and not thereafter. Significant benefits of MICS over sternotomy were noticed in the immediate postoperative parameters like duration of ventilation, mean drainage, postoperative pain, ICU stay, and hospital stay, with no difference in postoperative adverse events.

Surgical Closure of Atrial Septal Defects in Young Children-A Review of Anesthesia Care in Sternotomy and Thoracotomy Approaches

OBJECTIVES

To review and compare the anesthetic management of atrial septal defect (ASD) closures via mini lateral thoracotomy and sternotomy approaches.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis.

SETTING

Single- center pediatric quaternary care hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged <8 years of age undergoing ASD closure.

INTERVENTION

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Outcome measures included anesthetic technique, total amount and type of analgesics, pain scores, procedure duration, complications, blood transfusion requirements, and duration of stay. Each group had 15 patients. All patients in the sternotomy group received 0.25% bupivacaine subcutaneous infiltration. Eleven of the 15 thoracotomy patients received a fascial plane block, including serratus anterior and erector spinae blocks, and 3 received subcutaneous infiltration. There was no difference in opioid consumption intraoperatively or in the first 24 hours after surgery (0.28 ± 0.24 mg/kg morphine equivalents in thoracotomy group and 0.21 ± 0.12 mg/kg in sternotomy group). Duration of procedure and cardiopulmonary bypass duration were longer in the thoracotomy group. There was no difference in cross-clamp duration between groups. There was no difference in intensive care unit or hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors reviewed perioperative pain management strategies used in surgical ASD closures. Different fascial plane blocks were used. This study has paved way to design a randomized control trial to compare various regional techniques for cardiac surgeries and identified opportunities for improved pain assessment scoring in children after cardiac surgery.

Bronchial blocker versus double-lumen endobronchial tube in minimally invasive cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

To compare the therapeutic value of a bronchial blocker (BB) with a double-lumen tube (DLT) in minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS).

METHODS

Sixty patients who underwent MICS were randomized to use either a DLT (Group D, n = 30) or a BB (Group B, n = 29; one failed was omitted). The following data were collected: time of intubation and tube localization; incidence of tube displacement; postoperative sore throat and hoarseness; time of cardiopulmonary bypass; maintenance time for SpO₂ < 90% (PaCO₂ < 60 mmHg); mean arterial pressure and heart rate; SpO₂, PaO₂, PaCO₂, EtCO₂, mean airway pressure, and airway peak pressure; surgeons' satisfaction with anesthesia; and short-term complications.

RESULTS

The times of intubation and tube localization were significantly longer in Group B than in Group D (P < 0.05). Patients in Group B exhibited significantly lower incidence of tube displacement, postoperative sore throat, and hoarseness when compared with patients in Group D (P < 0.05). Mean arterial pressure and heart rate were significantly lower in Group B than in Group D after tracheal intubation (P < 0.05). The mean airway pressure and airway peak pressure were significantly lower in Group B than in Group D after one-lung ventilation (P < 0.05). SpO₂ and PaO₂ in Group B were significantly higher than in group D after cardiopulmonary bypass (P < 0.05). No short-term postoperative complications were observed in patients of Groups B and D during 3 month follow-up.

CONCLUSION

BB can be a potential alternative to the conventional DLT for lung isolation in MICS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR1900024250, July 2, 2019.

A comparison of extraluminal and intraluminal use of the Uniblocker in left thoracic surgery: A CONSORT-compliant article

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety issues concerning extraluminal use of the Uniblocker for one-lung ventilation (OLV) in the left thoracic surgery.

METHODS

Forty patients undergoing elective left thoracic surgery were included in this study, and all patients were randomly allocated to extraluminal use of Uniblocker group (E group, n = 20) or intraluminal use of Uniblocker group (I group, n = 20). Time for intubation, time for verification of the correct position of Uniblocker, incidence of Uniblocker displacement, index of pulmonary collapse, mean arterial pressure, heart rate, peak airway pressure, oxygen saturation in two-lung ventilation, and 30 minutes after OLV, bronchial damage after OLV, sore throat, and hoarseness postoperative were recorded.

RESULTS

The time for positioning Uniblocker was 112.6 ± 31.2 seconds in intraluminal use group, whereas the time for positioning Uniblocker was significantly shorter in extraluminal use group (63.4 ± 15.8 seconds). The incidence of main bronchial injury, the time of intubation, the incidence of Uniblocker malposition after initial placement, the time of OLV, the degree of pulmonary collapse, mean arterial pressure, heart rate, peak airway pressure, oxygen saturation in two-lung ventilation, and 30 minutes after OLV, the incidence of sore throat and hoarseness postoperative have no statistical significance (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Extraluminal use of the Uniblocker was proved to be a more rapid and more accurate method than conventional intraluminal use of the Uniblocker for OLV in left thoracic surgery.