Robotic aortic valve replacement in the Middle East: reproducibility into practice with evolving complexity
- PMID: 40547422
- PMCID: PMC12177770
- DOI: 10.21037/acs-2024-ravr-0195
Robotic aortic valve replacement in the Middle East: reproducibility into practice with evolving complexity
Abstract
Background: Robotic aortic valve replacement (RAVR) has seen a rise in usage in recent years; however, follow-up data remain limited. This study aimed to assess the short- and mid-term clinical outcomes after RAVR.
Methods: This study included patients who underwent RAVR between 2022 and 2024. The primary outcomes were mortality and survival at follow-up. The secondary outcomes were hospital complications and echocardiographic parameters at follow-up.
Results: Fifteen patients underwent RAVR. The mean age was 38.6±14.4 years, and 86.7% were males. The median Society of Thoracic Surgery (STS) score was 0.6%. Isolated RAVR was performed in 66.7% of the patients (n=10), whereas five patients underwent concomitant surgery, including mitral valve repair (n=1), mitral valve replacement (n=3), and ascending aortoplasty (n=1). Mechanical valves were used in 10 patients (66.7%). The mean ischemic time was 150±33.9 min. No sternotomy conversion was required. The median length of hospital stay was 9 days [quartile (Q)1-Q3, 4-15 days]. Four patients had on-table extubation (26.7%). One patient required intensive care unit (ICU) readmission, and one patient was readmitted for pleural effusion. The median follow-up was 24 months (Q1-Q3, 15-29 months). No mortality was reported during this period. All patients were in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class I, except for one in NYHA II. There were no significant changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LEVF) at the last follow-up compared with the preoperative value (P=0.741). However, the left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) was significantly lower at follow-up than preoperatively (P=0.003).
Conclusions: RAVR demonstrates promising short- and mid-term clinical outcomes. Its minimally invasive nature and the ability to use durable mechanical valves may offer potential advantages over traditional surgical and transcatheter approaches.
Keywords: Robotic; aortic valve disease; aortic valve replacement; minimally invasive surgery.
Copyright © 2025 AME Publishing Company. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Figures
Similar articles
-
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.
-
Establishing a robotic aortic valve replacement program in Spain: growing opportunities for Europe.Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2025 May 31;14(3):218-224. doi: 10.21037/acs-2025-ravr-0003. Epub 2025 May 29. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2025. PMID: 40547431 Free PMC article.
-
A Mid-Term Follow-Up in Patients with Symptomatic Moderate to Severe and Severe Degenerative Mitral Valve Regurgitation After Transapical NeoChord Implantation.Biomedicines. 2025 Jul 17;13(7):1751. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines13071751. Biomedicines. 2025. PMID: 40722822 Free PMC article.
-
Robotic Aortic Valve Replacement vs Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.Ann Thorac Surg. 2025 Jul;120(1):62-70. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2024.10.013. Epub 2024 Oct 30. Ann Thorac Surg. 2025. PMID: 39481823
-
The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of carmustine implants and temozolomide for the treatment of newly diagnosed high-grade glioma: a systematic review and economic evaluation.Health Technol Assess. 2007 Nov;11(45):iii-iv, ix-221. doi: 10.3310/hta11450. Health Technol Assess. 2007. PMID: 17999840
References
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources