Systematic review and meta-analysis of mid-term survival, reoperation, and recurrent mitral regurgitation for robotic-assisted mitral valve repair

BACKGROUND

Over the past two decades surgical approaches for mitral valve (MV) disease have evolved with the advent of minimally invasive techniques. Robotic mitral valve repair (RMVr) safety and efficacy has been well documented, however, mid- to long-term data are limited. The aim of this review was to provide a comprehensive analysis of the available mid- to long-term data for RMVr.

METHODS

Electronic searches of five databases were performed to identify all relevant studies reporting minimum five-year data on RMVr. Pre-defined primary outcomes of interest were overall survival, freedom from MV reoperation and from moderate or worse mitral regurgitation (MR) at five years or more post-RMVr. A meta-analysis of proportions or means was performed, utilizing a random effects model, to present the data. Kaplan-Meier curves were aggregated using reconstructed individual patient data.

RESULTS

Nine studies totaling 3,300 patients undergoing RMVr were identified. Rates of overall survival at 1-, 5- and 10-year were 99.2%, 97.4% and 92.3%, respectively. Freedom from MV reoperation at eight-years post RMVr was 95.0%. Freedom from moderate or worse MR at seven years was 86.0%. Rates of early post-operative complications were low with only 0.2% all-cause mortality and 1.0% cerebrovascular accident. Reoperation for bleeding was low at 2.2% and successful RMVr was 99.8%. Mean intensive care unit and hospital stay were 22.4 hours and 5.2 days, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

RMVr is a safe procedure with low rates of early mortality and other complications. It can be performed with low complication rates in high volume, experienced centers. Evaluation of available mid-term data post-RMVr suggests favorable rates of overall survival, freedom from MV reoperation and from moderate or worse MR recurrence.

Robotic mitral valve repair: A single center experience over a 7-year period

BACKGROUND

We report the clinical and echocardiographic results of our experience in robotic mitral valve repair over a 7-year period. The outcomes of the earliest and the latest patients will be compared.

METHODS

Between March 2012 and October 2019, 226 patients underwent robotic mitral valve repair for severe mitral regurgitation in a single institution. The first 113 patients (Group 1) were operated between March 2012 and September 2015 and the last 113 patients (Group 2) between October 2015 and October 2019. Conventional techniques employed in open surgery were used. Clinical and echographic follow-up were 96.0% and 94.2% complete, respectively.

RESULTS

Successful mitral repair was achieved in all cases with no hospital mortality. The overall survival rate was 92.7 ± 2.8% and 91.0 ± 3.2% at 3 and 7 years, respectively, with no in between groups difference (p = 0.513). The overall freedom from mitral reoperation was 97.4 ± 1.2% at 3 and 7 years and was similar in both groups (p = 0.276). Freedom from mitral regurgitation Grade 2+ at 3 and 7 years were 89.1 ± 2.6% and 87.9 ± 2.8%, respectively, with no significant difference between groups (p = 0.056).

CONCLUSIONS

Developing a robotic mitral repair program can be done without compromising the safety and efficacy of repair. After a well-conducted training, robotic approach allows to perform simple and complex mitral repair using similar techniques as in conventional approach and without additional risk for the patient.

Surgical effect and long-term clinical outcomes of robotic mitral valve replacement: 10-year follow-up study

BACKGROUND

To assess the safety and effectiveness, clinical experience with totally robotic mitral valve replacement (TE-MVR) for treating valvular heart disease was summarized and analyzed, and patients' recovery conditions were followed-up.

METHODS

The clinical data of 47 patients who received TE-MVR in our hospital between October 2008 and December 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. Among the patients, there are 26 men and 21 women. The mean age was 47.53±10.80 years. We followed up the transesophageal echocardiography (TTE) data of post-discharge patients and analyzed the operation results to determine the surgical effects of TE-MVR. The surgeries were mainly performed with the da Vinci Si robotic surgical system.

RESULTS

Thirty-five mechanical valves and twelve bioprosthetic valves were implanted. The cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross-clamping times were 122.02±25.45 min and 85.68±20.70 min, respectively. There was no operative mortality. The perioperative complication could only be found in one case, which was pleural effusion. All the TTE results were satisfying before discharge. No paravalvular leakage or prosthetic valve dysfunction was detected. All 47 patients were discharged successfully. During the long-term follow-up (28-110 months), 42 patients were followed-up (89.4%). Most of their heart function was NYHA class I and II. The postoperative TTE showed that the left atrial diameter and left ventricle diameter were decreased (P<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

TE-MVR is reliable and effective, and the postoperative follow-up results revealed good heart function. Patients will obtain benefits from TE-MVR, such as small trauma and rapid recovery. Thus, it is a good minimally-invasive surgery of choice.

[Comparison of quality of life and long-term outcomes following mitral valve replacement through robotically assisted versus median sternotomy approach]

OBJECTIVE

To compare the mid- and long-term outcomes of patients receiving mitral valve replacement through robotically assisted and conventional median sternotomy approach.

METHODS

The data of 47 patients who underwent da Vinci robotic mitral valve replacement in our hospital between January, 2007 and December, 2015 were collected retrospectively (robotic group). From a total of 286 patients undergoing mitral valve replacement through the median thoracotomy approach between March, 2002 and June, 2014, 47 patients were selected as the median sternotomy group for matching with the robotic group at a 1:1 ratio. The perioperative data and follow-up data of the patients were collected, and the quality of life (QOL) of the patients at 30 days and 6 months was evaluated using the Quality of Life Short Form Survey (SF-12). The time of returning to work postoperatively and the patients' satisfaction with the surgical incision were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

All the patients in both groups completed mitral valve replacement successfully, and no death occurred during the operation. In the robotic group, only one patient experienced postoperative complication (pleural effusion); in median sternotomy group, one patient received a secondary thoracotomy for management of bleeding resulting from excessive postoperative drainage, and one patient died of septic shock after the operation. The volume of postoperative drainage, postoperative monitoring time, ventilation time, and postoperative hospital stay were significantly smaller or shorter in the robotic group than in the thoracotomy group (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between the two groups. Assessment of the patients at 30 days after the operation showed a better quality of life in the robotic group, but the difference between the two groups tended to diminish at 6 months. The patients in the robotic group reported significantly better satisfaction with the incision than those in the thoracotomy group (P < 0.001). At 6 months after the operation, the patients in the robotic group showed significantly faster recovery of work and daily activities than those in the thoracotomy group.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotically assisted mitral valve replacement is safe and reliable. Compared with the median sternotomy approach, the robotic approach is less invasive and promotes faster postoperative recovery of the patients, who have better satisfaction with the quality of life and wound recovery.