Mini-thoracotomy in redo mitral valve surgery: safety and efficacy of a standardized procedure

Hypothermic Ventricular Fibrillation in Redo Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery: A Promising Solution for a Surgical Challenge

Background: Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) is a treatment for severe mitral valve pathologies. In redo cases, especially after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery with patent mammary bypass grafts, establishing aortic clamping followed by antegrade cardioplegia application might be challenging. Here, we present the outcome of hypothermic ventricular fibrillation as an alternative to conventional cardioprotection. Methods: Patients who underwent MIMVS either received hypothermic ventricular fibrillation (study group, n = 48) or antegrade cardioprotection (control group, n = 840) and were observed for 30 postoperative days. Data were retrospectively analyzed and collected from January 2011 until December 2022. Results: Patients in the study group had a higher preoperative prevalence of renal insufficiency (p = 0.001), extracardiac arteriopathy (p = 0.001), insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (p = 0.001) and chronic lung disease (p = 0.036). Furthermore, they had a longer surgery time and a lower repair rate (p < 0.001). No difference, however, was seen in postoperative incidences of stroke (p = 0.26), myocardial infarction (p = 1) and mitral valve re-operation (p = 1) as well as 30-day mortality (p = 0.1) and postoperative mitral valve insufficiency or stenosis. Conclusions: The patients who underwent redo MIMVS with hypothermic ventricular fibrillation did not have worse outcomes or more serious adverse events compared to the patients who received routine conventional cardioprotection. Therefore, the use of hypothermic ventricular fibrillation appears to be a promising cardioprotective technique in this challenging patient population requiring redo MIMVS.

Mitral valve repair for infective endocarditis after esophageal reconstruction: a case report

BACKGROUND

In patients with retrosternal neo-esophageal conduit after right thoracotomy, the approach to cardiac surgery could be challenging. Particularly, in patients with infective endocarditis, there is a risk of injury to the conduit through standard median sternotomy. Moreover, right lung adhesions could be predicted. Herein, we present a case of successful mitral valve repair in a patient with infective endocarditis through a redo right thoracotomy after esophageal reconstruction.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 66-year-old male patient was diagnosed with infective endocarditis and a large anterior mitral leaflet vegetation after a previous esophageal reconstruction via right thoracotomy for esophageal cancer. Due to the retrosternal esophageal reconstruction, we performed a mitral valve repair through a redo right thoracotomy. After resecting the vegetation, the defect was closed with a fresh autologous pericardial patch. Mitral valve annuloplasty was performed. Postoperatively, antibiotics controlled the infection. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 30.

CONCLUSIONS

Successful mitral valve repair was performed for infective endocarditis through a redo right thoracotomy after esophageal reconstruction.

Minimally Invasive Procedure versus Conventional Redo Sternotomy for Mitral Valve Surgery in Patients with Previous Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

The heightened morbidity and mortality associated with repeat cardiac surgery are well documented. Redo median sternotomy (MS) and minimally invasive valve surgery are options for patients with prior cardiac surgery who require mitral valve surgery (MVS). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the outcomes of redo MS and minimally invasive MVS (MIMVS) in this population.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus for studies comparing outcomes of redo MS and MIMVS for MVS. To calculate risk ratios (RRs) for binary outcomes and weighted mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, we employed a random-effects model.

Results

We included 12 retrospective observational studies, comprising 4157 participants (675 for MIMVS; 3482 for redo MS). Reductions in mortality (RR, 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-0.80), length of hospital stay (MD, -4.23; 95% CI, -5.77 to -2.68), length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (MD, -2.02; 95% CI, -3.17 to -0.88), and new-onset acute kidney injury (AKI) risk (odds ratio, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.61) were statistically significant and favored MIMVS (p<0.05). No significant differences were observed in aortic cross-clamp time, cardiopulmonary bypass time, or risk of perioperative stroke, new-onset atrial fibrillation, surgical site infection, or reoperation for bleeding (p>0.05).

Conclusion

The current literature, which primarily consists of retrospective comparisons, underscores certain benefits of MIMVS over redo MS. These include decreased mortality, shorter hospital and ICU stays, and reduced AKI risk. Given the lack of high-quality evidence, prospective randomized control trials with adequate power are necessary to investigate long-term outcomes.

A Retrospective Evaluation of Endo-Aortic Balloon Occlusion Compared to External Clamping in Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery

We compare outcomes of endo-aortic balloon occlusion (EABO) vs external aortic clamping (EAC) in patients undergoing minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) Adult Cardiac Surgery Database. Adults undergoing mitral valve surgery (July 2017-December 2018) were identified within the STS database (N = 60,607). Total 7,978 patients underwent a minimally invasive approach (including robotically assisted). About 1,163 EABO patients were 1:1 propensity-matched to EAC patients using exact matching on age, sex, and type of mitral procedure, and propensity score average matching for 16 other risk indicators. Early outcomes were compared. Categorical variables were compared using logistic regression; hospital and intensive care unit length of stay were compared using negative binomial regression. In the matched cohort, mean age was 62 years; 35.9% were female, and 86% underwent mitral valve repair. Cardiopulmonary bypass time was shorter for EABO vs EAC group (125.0 ± 53.0 vs 134.0 ± 67.0 minutes, P = 0.0009). There was one aortic dissection in the EAC group and none in the EABO group (P value > 0.31), and no statistically significant differences in cross-clamp time, major intraoperative bleeding, perioperative mortality, stroke, new onset of atrial fibrillation, postoperative acute kidney injury, success of repair. Median hospital LOS was shorter for EABO vs EAC procedures (4 vs 5 days, P < 0.0001). In this large, retrospective, STS database propensity-matched analysis ofpatients undergoing MIMVS, we observed similar safety outcomes for EABO and EAC, including no aortic dissections in the EABO group. The EABO group showed slightly shorter CPB times and hospital LOS.