Mini-sternotomy aortic valve replacement: is it safe and effective? Comparison with standard techniques
- PMID: 22655495
Mini-sternotomy aortic valve replacement: is it safe and effective? Comparison with standard techniques
Abstract
Background and aim of the study: Mini-sternotomy aortic valve replacement (MSAVR) has been increasingly performed at the authors' institution since October 2003. The study aim was to compare results obtained with MSAVR to those following AVR with conventional sternotomy (SAVR).
Methods: Between 1998 and 2008, a total of 143 consecutive patients (mean age: 67 +/- 12.5 years) underwent AVR at the authors' institution. Of these patients, 82 underwent SAVR, and 61 underwent MSAVR performed through a reversed-L-shaped median sternotomy with a transverse limb at the right fourth intercostal space. Ascending aortic and right atrial cannulation through the mini-sternotomy were employed for cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB).
Results: Typically, the MSAVR patients were slightly younger than SAVR patients (mean age: 67 +/- 16 years and 70 +/- 15 years, respectively; p = 0.037), had a lower incidence of diabetes (3% versus 18%, p = 0.008), and a slightly higher left ventricular ejection fraction (74.5 +/- 12% versus 71 +/- 12%, p = 0.019). There were no other inter-group preoperative differences. As expected, MSAVR required a slightly longer aortic cross-clamp time (49 +/- 19 min) compared to SAVR (44.5 +/- 16 min; p = 0.019), and longer CPB times (77 +/- 31 min versus 60 +/- 26 min; p <0.0001), though the overall operating times were similar (p = 0.38). Postoperatively, MSAVR patients were extubated at 3 +/- 5 h, similar to SAVR patients (4 +/- 5 h) (p = 0.13). The median intensive therapy unit stay was 1 +/- 1 days in both groups. The median hospital stay was comparable between groups (MSAVR, 7 +/- 5 days; SAVR, 8 +/- 4 days; p = 0.48). The MSAVR patients had a higher incidence of delayed pericardial effusions requiring pericardiocentesis (n = 4; p = 0.031), but this did not affect survival. The 30-day mortality was similar in both groups (MSAVR group, n = 1 (1.6%); SAVR group, n = 3 (3.7%); p = 0.64). At five years after surgery, freedom from cardiac-related death was 96 +/- 2.6% in MSAVR patients, and 89 +/- 4.9% in SAVR patients (p = 0.32).
Conclusion: Mini-sternotomy AVR is technically challenging with longer CPB and aortic cross-clamp times. However, with increasing surgical experience, it offers results comparable to those achieved with conventional AVR, and with acceptable cosmetic results.
Similar articles
-
Aortic and mitral valve surgery on the beating heart is lowering cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross clamp time.Heart Surg Forum. 2002;5(2):182-6. Heart Surg Forum. 2002. PMID: 12125670
-
Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (AVR) compared to standard AVR.Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1999 Nov;16 Suppl 2:S80-3. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1999. PMID: 10613563
-
Upper 'J' ministernotomy versus full sternotomy: an easier approach for aortic valve reoperation.J Heart Valve Dis. 2013 May;22(3):295-300. J Heart Valve Dis. 2013. PMID: 24151754
-
Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement: Cost-Benefit Analysis of Ministernotomy Versus Minithoracotomy Approach.J Heart Valve Dis. 2015 Sep;24(5):531-9. J Heart Valve Dis. 2015. PMID: 26897831 Review.
-
Aortic root enlargement does not increase the surgical risk and short-term patient outcome?Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011 Aug;40(2):441-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2010.11.064. Epub 2011 Jan 13. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011. PMID: 21236693 Review.
Cited by
-
Efficacy of Aortic Valve Replacement through Full Sternotomy and Minimal Invasion (Ministernotomy).Medicina (Kaunas). 2018 Apr 28;54(2):26. doi: 10.3390/medicina54020026. Medicina (Kaunas). 2018. PMID: 30344257 Free PMC article.
-
Limited versus full sternotomy for aortic valve replacement.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Dec 6;12(12):CD011793. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011793.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023. PMID: 38054555 Free PMC article.
-
Past, present, and future of minimal access cardiac surgery.J Thorac Dis. 2013 Nov;5 Suppl 6(Suppl 6):S629. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2013.07.23. J Thorac Dis. 2013. PMID: 24251018 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Aortic valve replacement through J-shaped partial upper sternotomy.J Thorac Dis. 2013 Nov;5 Suppl 6(Suppl 6):S662-8. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2013.10.02. J Thorac Dis. 2013. PMID: 24251025 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Limited versus full sternotomy for aortic valve replacement.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Apr 10;4(4):CD011793. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011793.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017. Update in: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Dec 6;12:CD011793. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011793.pub3. PMID: 28394022 Free PMC article. Updated.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Research Materials