Minimally invasive redo mitral valve surgery without aortic crossclamp

Minithoracotomy and Beating Heart Strategy for Mitral Surgery in Secondary Mitral Regurgitation

BACKGROUND

In patients with secondary mitral regurgitation (MR) associated with low ejection fraction or previous heart surgery, minimally invasive mitral valve surgery without aortic cross-clamp (MIMVS-WAC) has shown promising results. We report our experience for this strategy in our centers.

METHODS

Between August 2011 and April 2017, 46 patients (mean age 69 ± 11 years, 76% males) received MIMVS-WAC. Indications for this technique were prior coronary bypass surgery (26%), severe or recent left ventricular (LV) dysfunction (30%), or both (39%). The mean EuroSCORE II was 12 ± 10.

RESULTS

For each procedure, we conducted right minithoracotomy and hypothermic cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) after peripheral cannulation. Mean CPB time was 159 ± 39 minutes. A mitral valve replacement (MVR) was performed in 23 cases (50%), an annuloplasty in 22 cases (48%), and a prosthesis pannus removal in 1 case (2%). Mean hospital length of stay was 12 ± 5.4 days. We report no sternotomy conversions, six reoperations for bleeding, and three deaths at 30 days. Transfusion was requested in 62% (mean infusion 2 ± 2.4 packed red blood cells). The postoperative echocardiography showed an LV function preservation in 69% of cases and a reduction of pulmonary arterial pressure in 73% of cases. Four additional deaths occurred in the long-term follow-up (mean 637 ± 381 days, median 593 days). No mitral reoperation was required, with a MR ≤ 2 in 90% of patients.

CONCLUSION

In high-risk patients, the MIMVS-WAC is a safe technique. It avoids hard dissections while ensuring excellent preservation of cardiac function.

A right thoracotomy approach for mitral and tricuspid valve surgery in patients with previous standard sternotomy: comparison with a re-sternotomy approach

BACKGROUND

To compare the outcomes of mitral and/or tricuspid valve surgery in patients with previous sternotomy between those who underwent a right thoracotomy and those who underwent re-sternotomy.

METHODS

Between October 2009 and May 2015, eighteen patients underwent a right thoracotomy (R group) and 28 underwent re-sternotomy (re-S group). The right thoracotomy was prioritized for previous coronary artery bypass grafting. Follow-up was 100 % complete with a mean follow-up of 1.9 ± 1.5 years for the R group and 2.5 ± 1.4 years for the re-S group (p = 0.2137).

RESULTS

Hypothermic ventricular fibrillation was applied in 33.3 % in the R group and in 7.1 % in the re-S group (p = 0.0424). Hospital mortality, the median intensive care unit stay, and the median postoperative hospital stay were 0 % versus 7.1 % (p = 0.5130), 3 days versus 2 days (p = 0.2370), and 28 days versus 29.5 days (p = 0.8043) for the R group versus the re-S group, respectively. Although the rate of major complications was comparable (R group 33.3 % versus re-S group 25.0 %, p = 0.5401), those contents were not equal. Deep sternum infection developed only in the re-S group (3.6 %) and reoperation for bleeding was required only in the R group (11.1 %). No significant difference was observed in the 2-year cardiac-related mortality-free rate (R group 93.3 ± 6.4 % versus re-S group 90.8 ± 6.4 %, p = 0.7516).

CONCLUSIONS

Given study limitations, the right thoracotomy approach after previous sternotomy provided favorable outcomes as well as re-sternotomy. When selecting a right thoracotomy for re-do mitral and/or tricuspid surgery, the surgical strategy needs to be thoroughly planned.