BACKGROUND: Proposed advantages of port-access cardiac surgery have yet to be substantiated. The authors retrospectively compared patients undergoing port-access cardiac surgery with a matched group undergoing conventional cardiac surgery. METHODS: Forty-six patients who underwent port-access cardiac surgery were matched with 46 who underwent conventional cardiac surgery. Absolute criteria for matching included morning-of-surgery admission, procedure undergone, and care being delivered by one of two surgeons. If possible, matching included care delivered by one of two anesthesiologists. Patients were matched as closely as possible for preoperative demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: All 46 pairs of patients were matched for procedure and admitted the morning of surgery. All 92 operations were performed by one of two surgeons, and 89% were performed by one of two anesthesiologists. Preoperative demographic and clinical characteristics were equivalent between groups. Compared with conventional cardiac surgery, port-access cardiac surgery increased surgical complexity (it almost tripled cardiopulmonary bypass time during coronary artery bypass grafting and increased it almost 40% during mitral valve procedures) and increased total operating room time (P < 0.0001). Port-access cardiac surgery had no beneficial effect on earlier postoperative extubation, decreased incidence of atrial fibrillation, or intensive care unit time, yet it decreased postoperative duration of stay (P = 0.029, all patients), a benefit observed primarily in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis revealed that port-access cardiac surgery increases surgical complexity, increases operating room time, has no effect on earlier postoperative extubation or decreased incidence of atrial fibrillation or intensive care unit time, and may facilitate postoperative hospital discharge (primarily in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting). Properly designed prospective investigation is necessary to ascertain whether port-access cardiac surgery truly offers any benefits over conventional cardiac surgery.
BACKGROUND: Proposed advantages of port-access cardiac surgery have yet to be substantiated. The authors retrospectively compared patients undergoing port-access cardiac surgery with a matched group undergoing conventional cardiac surgery. METHODS: Forty-six patients who underwent port-access cardiac surgery were matched with 46 who underwent conventional cardiac surgery. Absolute criteria for matching included morning-of-surgery admission, procedure undergone, and care being delivered by one of two surgeons. If possible, matching included care delivered by one of two anesthesiologists. Patients were matched as closely as possible for preoperative demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: All 46 pairs of patients were matched for procedure and admitted the morning of surgery. All 92 operations were performed by one of two surgeons, and 89% were performed by one of two anesthesiologists. Preoperative demographic and clinical characteristics were equivalent between groups. Compared with conventional cardiac surgery, port-access cardiac surgery increased surgical complexity (it almost tripled cardiopulmonary bypass time during coronary artery bypass grafting and increased it almost 40% during mitral valve procedures) and increased total operating room time (P < 0.0001). Port-access cardiac surgery had no beneficial effect on earlier postoperative extubation, decreased incidence of atrial fibrillation, or intensive care unit time, yet it decreased postoperative duration of stay (P = 0.029, all patients), a benefit observed primarily in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis revealed that port-access cardiac surgery increases surgical complexity, increases operating room time, has no effect on earlier postoperative extubation or decreased incidence of atrial fibrillation or intensive care unit time, and may facilitate postoperative hospital discharge (primarily in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting). Properly designed prospective investigation is necessary to ascertain whether port-access cardiac surgery truly offers any benefits over conventional cardiac surgery.
Authors: James Studnicki; Christopher Craver; Christopher M Blanchette; John W Fisher; Sara Shahbazi Journal: BMC Surg Date: 2014-08-16 Impact factor: 2.102