Does full sternotomy have more significant impact than the cardiopulmonary bypass time in patients of mitral valve surgery?

Survival Analysis of Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery Versus Conventional Median Sternotomy in the United States

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MiMVS), particularly via right mini-thoracotomy, has gained popularity as an alternative to median sternotomy, potentially reducing surgical trauma and recovery time. However, recent data on its surgical outcomes remain limited. To provide updated insights while minimizing selection bias, we analyzed elective patients undergoing mitral valve surgery, comparing MiMVS and sternotomy in terms of survival, operative times, and perioperative complications.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study that included patients who underwent mitral valve surgery between 2015 and 2024. Patients were stratified into MiMVS or sternotomy groups. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and log-rank tests assessed survival, while propensity score matching (PSM) minimized selection bias.

RESULTS

Among 422 patients (319 MiMVS, 103 sternotomy), the MiMVS group had a shorter hospital stay (5.0 vs. 8.0 days, p < 0.01) and lower postoperative bleeding (3.9% vs. 9%). Median cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) times were shorter in MiMVS (76 vs. 94 min, p < 0.01; and 114 vs. 140 min, p < 0.01, respectively). Survival analysis showed no significant difference between groups (log-rank p = 0.07) after PSM. The adjusted hazard ratio for mortality in MiMVS versus sternotomy was 0.30 (95% CI: 0.08-1.12, p = 0.07). However, mitral replacement was associated with a significantly higher mortality risk than mitral repair (HR 5.22, 95% CI: 1.26-21.61, p = 0.04). In-hospital mortality was comparable (1.9% for sternotomy vs. 0.6% for MiMVS, p = 0.25). Reoperation rates at five and 10 years were lower in MiMVS (1.7% vs. 2.1% at five years and 1.7% vs. 3.2% at 10 years).

CONCLUSIONS

While MiMVS offers advantages such as shorter hospital stays and lower postoperative bleeding rates, no statistically significant difference in overall survival was found compared to sternotomy. However, a trend toward improved survival with MiMVS was observed. Notably, mitral valve replacement was associated with a significantly higher mortality risk than mitral repair, emphasizing the importance of prioritizing repair whenever feasible.

Endoscopic Minimally Invasive Approach Versus Median Sternotomy for Multiple-Valve Surgery: A Propensity-Matched Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic minimally invasive valve surgery is a promising alternative to valve surgery through median sternotomy. Our study compared the short-term outcomes of patients undergoing endoscopic minimally invasive multiple concomitant valve surgeries (MIMVS) with median sternotomy (MS).

METHODS

Demographic, clinical, and procedural data of all consecutive patients who underwent multiple-valve surgeries at two institutions in Germany from March of 2017 to March of 2023 were retrospectively collected. Patients were divided into two groups: MIMVS versus MS and their outcomes were compared before and after propensity score matching. Primary endpoint was the incidence of 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 317 patients were included in the study; 112 patients in each group were matched 1:1. MIMVS was performed on 123 patients. After propensity matching, 30-day mortality rates were 8% for MIMVS versus 12.5% for MS (p = 0.28). Median blood transfusion in the MIMVS group was 0 [0-3] vs 1 [0-4] in the MS group (p = 0.002). MIMVS was associated with similar cardiopulmonary bypass time 105.5 [79.8-124] versus 98 [68.8-130.3] mins and aortic cross clamping times 70 [53-80.3] versus 63.5 [46-90.3] mins (p values 0.9 and 0.76, respectively). Median intensive care and inhospital stays were similar between both groups (2 [1-4] vs 2 [1-5] days, p = 0.36, and 12 [8-17] vs 12.5 [9-21] days, p = 0.38). Incidences of intrathoracic bleeding, stroke, and acute kidney injury were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, endoscopic minimally invasive multiple-valve surgeries through right anterior mini-thoracotomy is as feasible, safe, and effective as medial sternotomy in select patients.

Pushing boundaries in cardiac surgery: minimally invasive mitral valve repair combined with tricuspid valve repair and/or other concomitant procedures

Introduction

Minimally invasive mitral valve repair/replacement has emerged as a widely accepted surgical approach for managing mitral valve disorders. Continuous technological progress has contributed to the refinement of this procedure, leading to improved safety, decreased surgical trauma, and faster recovery times. Despite these advancements, there remains a scarcity of data concerning minimally invasive complex mitral valve repair surgeries when combined with additional procedures.

Methods

Between November 2008 and December 2022, 153 patients underwent an operation using a minimally invasive technique. All patients underwent mitral valve surgery for severe mitral valve insufficiency/stenosis in combination with at least one additional procedure for tricuspid valve repair (n = 52, 34%), patent foramen ovale or atrial septal defect closure (n = 34, 22.2%), left atrial appendage occlusion (n = 25, 16.3%), or electrophysiological procedure (n = 101, 66.0%). Two concomitant procedures were conducted in 98 patients (64.1%), three concomitant procedures in 49 patients (32%), and four concomitant procedures in 6 patients (3.9%).

Results

Surgical success was achieved in 99.3% of the patients (n = 152), one patient required a revision of the mitral valve repair on the first postoperative day due to systolic anterior motion phenomenon. Mitral valve repair was performed in 136 patients (88.9%), while 15 patients (9.8%) received a mitral valve replacement as per a preoperative decision due to severe mitral valve stenosis, and two patients (1.3%) underwent other mitral valve procedures. Therapeutic success in treating atrial fibrillation was achieved in 86 patients (85.1%) of the 101 who received an additional maze-procedure. The 30-day mortality rate was 0.7%, with one patient succumbing to respiratory failure. Neurological complications occurred in 7 patients (4.6%). Freedom from reoperation was calculated as 98% at 5-year follow-up and 96.5% at 10-year follow-up.

Conclusion

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery, even when performed alongside concomitant procedures, stands out as a reproducible and safe technique with outstanding outcomes. It is imperative to advance towards the next frontier in minimally invasive surgery, encouraging experienced surgeons to undertake more complex procedures using minimally invasive approaches. These results help envision extending the boundaries of minimally invasive surgery by performing complex mitral valve procedures and associated interventions entirely through endoscopic means in suitable patients.

Mitral Valve Re-Repair Due to Chordal Pseudo-Elongation Through Repeated Right Anterior Minithoracotomy

OBJECTIVE

We aim to show the step-by-step surgical technique of mitral valve re-repair by means of a repeated right anterior minithoracotomy in a case of a procedure-related early mitral valve repair failure due to left ventricular positive remodeling and chordal pseudo-elongation.

METHODS

The patient was readdressed to our institution for an early severe mitral valve regurgitation, less than a year after performing a right minithoracotomy mitral valve repair (42-mm annular ring implantation, P2 triangular resection, and P2 neochord positioning). The mechanism was attributed to a positive left ventricle remodeling and neochordal pseudo-elongation. Therefore, we decided to perform a mitral valve re-repair in a redo minimally invasive cardiac surgery. We describe in a video-guided step-by-step fashion the surgical procedure, from the reopening of the right anterior minithoracotomy to the surgical strategy chosen to address the re-repair, guided by the mechanism of the previous repair failure.

RESULTS

We replaced the previously implanted ring with a smaller one and positioned a new polytetrafluoroethylene 4-0 neochord at the P2 level. The patient was discharged home on the fifth postoperative day after an uneventful hospital stay. Predischarge echocardiogram demonstrated undetectable residual mitral valve regurgitation. At 3-month follow-up, echocardiographic and clinical data were encouraging. At 9-month follow-up, the patient endorsed no recurrence of cardiologic symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Redo minimally invasive cardiac surgery is a viable option even in case of a mitral valve re-repair due to previous repair failure, especially when procedure related in degenerative mitral disease. Combining the benefits of mitral valve re-repair with those of a minimally invasive surgery may optimize short-term and long-term outcomes.

Case Series: Video-Assisted Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery During Pregnancy

Surgical intervention is expected to improve maternal outcomes in pregnant patients with heart disease once the conservative treatment fails. For pregnant patients with heart disease, the risk of cardiac surgery under cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) must be balanced due to the high fetal loss. The video-assisted minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) has been progressively applied and shows advantages in non-pregnant patients over the years. We present five cases of pregnant women who underwent a video-assisted minimally invasive surgical approach for cardiac surgery and the management strategies. In conclusion, the video-assisted MICS is feasible and safe to pregnant patients, with good maternal and fetal outcomes under the multidisciplinary assessment and management.

Conventional sternotomy versus right mini-thoracotomy versus robotic approach for mitral valve replacement/repair; insights from a network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) through right mini-thoracotomy as well as robotic surgery has emerged for the last decade for mitral valve surgery. However, their risks and benefits are not fully understood yet. Thus, we conducted a network meta-analysis comparing the early- and long-term outcomes of mitral valve surgery via the conventional sternotomy, MICS, and robotic approaches.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through November, 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-score matched (PSM) trials that investigated early- and long-term outcomes after mitral surgery via the conventional sternotomy, MICS, and robotic approaches. A subalalysis focusing on only subjects who initially underwent mitral valve repair was also conducted.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Our systematic literature search identified 2 RCTs and 19 PSM studies. MICS was related to significant risk reductions of permanent pacemaker implantation, surgical site infection, and transfusion compared to the sternotomy approach. The robotic approach was associated with a significant increase in re-exploration for bleeding compared to sternotomy. The subanalysis showed that MICS was associated with a significant increase requiring mitral valve reoperation compared to the sternotomy approach (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] =7.33 [1.54-34.97], p=0.012), while no significant difference was observed between the sternotomy and the robotic approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Our network meta-analysis demonstrated that MICS was associated with better short-term outcomes compared to the sternotomy approach. Mitral valve reoperation was more frequent with MICS compared with the sternotomy approach after mitral valve repair, while no difference was observed between the sternotomy and robotic approaches.

Long-term results after mitral valve surgery using minimally invasive versus sternotomy approach: a propensity matched comparison of a large single-center series

BACKGROUND

Mitral valve (MV) surgery has traditionally been performed by conventional sternotomy (CS), but more recently minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has become another treatment option. The aim of this study is to compare short- and long-term results of MV surgery after CS and MIS.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective propensity-matched analysis of MV operations between January 2005 and December 2015.

RESULTS

Among 1357 patients, 496 underwent CS and 861 MIS. Matching resulted in 422 patients per group. The procedure time was longer with MIS than CS (192 vs. 185 min; p = 0.002) as was cardiopulmonary bypass time (133 vs. 101 min; p < 0.001) and X-clamp time (80 vs. 71 min; p < 0.001). 'Short-term' successful valve repair was higher with MIS (96.0% vs. 76.0%, p < 0.001). Length of hospital stay was shorter in MIS than CS patients (10 vs. 11 days; p = 0.001). There was no difference in the overall 30-day mortality rate. Cardiovascular death was lower after MIS (1.2%) compared with CS (3.8%; OR 0.30; 95%CI 0.11-0.84). The difference did not remain significant after adjustment for procedural differences (aOR 0.40; 95%CI 0.13-1.25). Pacemaker was required less often after MIS (3.3%) than CS (11.2%; aOR 0.31; 95%CI 0.16-0.61), and acute renal failure was less common (2.1% vs. 11.9%; aOR 0.22; 95%CI 0.10-0.48). There were no significant differences with respect to rates of stroke, myocardial infarction or repeat MV surgery. The 7-year survival rate was significantly better after MIS (88.5%) than CS (74.8%; aHR 0.44, 95%CI 0.31-0.64).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that good results for MV surgery can be obtained with MIS, achieving a high MV repair rate, low peri-procedural morbidity and mortality, and improved long-term survival.

Outcome of Unilateral Pulmonary Edema after Minimal-Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery: 10-Year Follow-Up

The study was approved by the institutional review board (IRB) at the University Medical Center Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany (reference number: AZ D 559/18) and registered at the German Clinical Trials Register (reference number: DRKS00022222).

OBJECTIVE

Unilateral pulmonary edema (UPE) is a complication after minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS). We analyzed the impact of this complication on the short- and long-term outcome over a 10-year period.

METHODS

We retrospectively observed 393 MIMVS patients between 01/2009 and 12/2019. The primary endpoint was a radiographically and clinically defined UPE within the first postoperative 24 h, secondary endpoints were 30-day and long-term mortality and the percentage of patients requiring ECLS. Risk factors for UPE incidence were evaluated by logistic regression, and risk factors for mortality in the follow-up period were assessed by Cox regression.

RESULTS

Median EuroSCORE II reached 0.98% in the complete MIMVS group. Combined 30-day and in-hospital mortality after MIMVS was 2.0% with a 95, 93 and 77% survival rate after 1, 3 and 10 years. Seventy-two (18.3%) of 393 patients developed a UPE 24 h after surgery. Six patients (8.3%) with UPE required an extracorporeal life-support system. Logistic regression analysis identified a higher creatinine level, a worse LV function, pulmonary hypertension, intraoperative transfusion and a longer aortic clamp time as predictors for UPE. Combined in hospital mortality and 30-day mortality was slightly but not significantly higher in the UPE group (4.2 vs. 1.6%; p = 0.17). Predictors for mortality during follow-up were age ≥ 70 years, impaired RVF, COPD, drainage loss ≥ 800 mL and length of ventilation ≥ 48 h. During a median follow-up of 4.6 years, comparable survival between UPE and non-UPE patients was seen in our analysis after 5 years (89 vs. 88%; p = 0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

In-hospital outcome with UPE after MIMVS was not significantly worse compared to non-UPE patients, and no differences were observed in the long-term follow-up. However, prolonged aortic clamp time, worse renal and left ventricular function, pulmonary hypertension and transfusion are associated with UPE.

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.

Outcomes in minimally invasive double valve surgery

OBJECTIVE

To review current literature evidence on outcomes of minimally invasive double valve surgeries (MIS).

METHODS

A comprehensive electronic literature search was done from inception to 20th June 2020 identifying articles that discussed outcomes of minimally invasive approach in double valve surgeries either as a solo cohort or as comparative to conventional sternotomies. No limit was placed on time and place of publication and the evidence has been summarized in narrative manner within the manuscript.

RESULTS

Majority of current literature reported similar perioperative and clinical outcomes between MIS and conventional median sternotomy; except that MIS has better cosmetic effects and pain control. Nevertheless, minimal invasive techniques are associated with longer cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross-clamp times which may have impact on the reported outcomes and overall morbidity and mortality rates.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive double valve surgery continues to develop, but scarcity in the literature suggests uptake is slow, possibly due to the learning curve associated with MIS. Many outcomes appear to be comparable to conventional sternotomy. There is need for larger, multi-center, and randomized trial to fully evaluate and establish the early, mid- and long-term morbidity and mortality rates associated with both techniques.

Pilot study of totally thoracoscopic periareolar approach for minimally invasive mitral valve surgery. Towards even less invasive?

Introduction

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) has become a widely accepted alternative to the standard sternotomy approach for treatment of mitral valve (MV) disease. Because the extent and location of mini-thoracotomies employed for MIMVS vary from center to center, the conclusions regarding superior cosmesis are not generalizable. The totally thoracoscopic periareolar (TTP) – MIMVS technique has been used at our department for minimally invasive cardiac surgery since 2015.

Aim

To report early surgical data as well as mid-term outcomes in patients undergoing TTP-MIMVS.

Material and methods

Between 2015 and 2017, 48 consecutive patients (mean age: 65.4 ±10; 83% men; EuroSCORE II: 5.1 ±4%) underwent TTP-MIMVS due to mitral and mitral/tricuspid valve (TV) disease; patients’ demographics and clinical outcomes were prospectively collected. Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival and freedom from re-intervention were analyzed as well.

Results

Mean follow-up was 1.7 (max 2.5) years. Of 48 patients, 33 (69%) underwent isolated MV repair, 4 (8%) isolated MV replacement and 11 (23%) MV/TV repair. The cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross-clamp time was 166 ±70 and 103 ±39 min respectively. There was no conversion to either full sternotomy or a mini-thoracotomy approach. Median (interquartile range) duration of intensive care unit stay was 1.2 (1.0–2.0) days. There was one in-hospital death (2.1%) in the TTP-MIMVS group. No strokes or wound infections were observed. Within the investigated follow-up, the freedom from reoperation rate was 96.4%; remote survival was estimated at 96.9%.

Conclusions

The study proved that TTP-minimally invasive surgery was safe and feasible in mitral and tricuspid valve surgery. It has been associated with superior esthetics. Mitral repairs performed through TTP access are durable in mid-term observation.