Three-year follow-up after port-access mitral valve surgery

Minimally invasive heart valve surgery: already established in clinical routine?

Cardiac valve replacement with the need for open heart surgery still has the highest morbidity and mortality rates among routine cardiac surgery, with the exception of aortic aneurysm repair and surgery for congenital heart defects. Reducing invasiveness is a desirable goal, and different strategies and approaches have been used to achieve this with valve repair or replacement less invasive. Despite the good results reported with minimally invasive techniques, time on extracorporal circulation is always longer compared with the conventional procedures. Since these techniques do not reduce real invasiveness but rather improve the cosmetic results, minimal-access surgery would be a better nomenclature. With the exception of patients at a high risk for sternal infections or redo heart operations, a reduction in postoperative morbidity by the avoidance of a median sternotomy is not yet definitely proven. Meanwhile, most surgeons comply with the demand for minimally invasive surgery posed by patients by reducing the length of the incision in aortic valve replacement and by using a right anterolateral approach with a limited incision for mitral valve operations. However, the use of endoscopic or robotic devices is limited to a few centers, and has not yet found its way into clinical routine. Nonetheless, minimally invasive or minimal-access surgery is now established in many centers, and patients should always be informed of these techniques. When this information is provided objectively and patient selection is carried out accurately, these alternative approaches can help to improve postoperative convalescence.

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The mitral valve has been traditionally approached through a median sternotomy. However, significant advances in surgical optics, instrumentation, tissue telemanipulation, and perfusion technology have allowed for mitral valve surgery to be performed using progressively smaller incisions including the minithoracotomy and hemisternotomy. Due to reports of excellent results, minimally invasive mitral valve surgery has become a standard of care at certain specialized centers worldwide. This meta-analysis quantifies the effects of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery on morbidity and mortality compared with conventional mitral surgery and demonstrates equivalent perioperative mortality (1641 patients, odds ratio (OR) 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.15-1.42, p=0.18), reduced need for reoperation for bleeding (1553 patients, OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.35-0.90, p=0.02) and a trend towards shorter hospital stays (350 patients, weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.73, 95% CI -1.52 to 0.05, p=0.07). These benefits were evident despite longer cardiopulmonary bypass (WMD 25.81, 95% CI 13.13-38.50, p<0.0001) and cross-clamp times (WMD 20.91, 95% CI 8.79-33.04, p=0.0007) in the minimally invasive group. Case-control studies show consistently less pain and faster recovery compared to those having a conventional approach. Data for minimally invasive mitral valve surgery after previous cardiac surgery are limited but consistently demonstrate reduced blood loss, fewer transfusions and faster recovery compared to reoperative sternotomy. Long-term follow-up data from multiple cohort studies are also examined revealing equivalent survival and freedom from reoperation. Thus, current clinical data suggest that minimally invasive mitral valve surgery is a safe and a durable alternative to a conventional approach and is associated with less morbidity.

Video and Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery: A Comparison of the Port-access and Transthoracic Clamp Techniques

BACKGROUND

In order to assess different surgical techniques for video-assisted minimally invasive mitral valve surgery, a retrospective study was undertaken comparing the Port-Access system (Cardiovations, Ethicon Inc, Somerville, NJ) and the transthoracic clamp technique.

METHODS

In 120 patients mitral valve surgery was performed through a small right minithoracotomy using either the Port-Access endovascular cardiopulmonary bypass system (Port-Access, n = 60) or the transthoracic clamp technique (MICRO, n = 60). Mean patient age was 61.5 +/- 10.5 years (81 patients with isolated mitral valve insufficiency, 39 patients with combined mitral valve disease).

RESULTS

Eighty-one (67.5%) patients underwent mitral valve repair and 39 (32.5%) patients had valve replacement. Mean time of surgery was 4.5 +/- 3.5 and 4.1 +/- 3.2 hours (p = 0.07), aortic cross-clamp time 89 +/- 69 and 78 +/- 65 minutes (p = 0.08), mean intensive care unit stay 1.5 +/- 2.1 and 1.6 +/- 2.5 days (p = ns), and hospital stay 9.0 +/- 10.5 and 9.2 +/- 9.7 days (p = ns) in the Port-Access and MICRO groups, respectively. In the Port-Access group, there were 6 reexplorations for bleeding, one perforation of the right ventricle with the endopulmonary vent, and 2 reconstructions of the femoral artery necessary after femoral cannulation, compared to one reexploration for bleeding in the MICRO group. There was only one minor paravalvular leak after replacement and 2 cases of residual greater than or equal to grade II mitral valve regurgitation after mitral valve repair in the Port-Access group, necessitating reoperation. In both groups, there was no mortality, no cerebrovascular accident, no aortic dissection, and no conversion to sternotomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery has become a standard approach for isolated mitral valve operations at our institution. The MICRO technique tends to shorten the time of surgery and aortic cross-clamping and reduces perioperative costs by simplifying the operative procedure.

Minimally invasive valve surgery: different techniques and approaches

Less invasive approaches to cardiac surgical procedures are being developed in an effort to decrease patient morbidity and enhance postoperative recovery in comparison with conventional methods. Although full median sternotomy has been the standard surgical approach to the heart for more than 30 years, minimally invasive techniques using limited incisions are rapidly gaining acceptance. Potential advantages of a small skin incision include less trauma and tissue injury, leading to a less painful and quicker overall recovery, as well as shorter hospital stays for patients. Decreasing the size of the skin incision for minimally invasive valve surgery to significantly less than the cardiac size requires specific access to the valve to be repaired or replaced. Thus, various minimally invasive techniques and approaches have been described for aortic and mitral valve surgery. This article will review the different minimally invasive techniques and approaches, as well as early results and outcomes for aortic and mitral valve surgery.