Literature DB >> 17629860

Should minimally invasive aortic valve replacement be restricted to primary interventions?

I Bakir1, F P Casselman, R De Geest, F Wellens, I Degrieck, F Van Praet, Y Vermeulen, H Vanermen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The role of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement in cardiac reoperations has not yet been defined. The purpose of this study is to report our experience with this technique.
METHODS: Nineteen consecutive patients underwent aortic valve replacement via J-sternotomy as a reoperative cardiac procedure between 1999 and 2005. The mean age was 73.6 +/- 11.4 years. Previous cardiac operations included 12 (63.2 %) coronary artery bypass graftings, 6 (31.5 %) aortic valve replacements and 1 (5.2 %) mitral valve replacement. Mean follow-up was 23.6 +/- 19.7 months. The medical records were retrospectively analyzed.
RESULTS: All procedures were successful. Mean aortic cross-clamping time and cardiopulmonary bypass time were 87.4 +/- 32.7 and 133.1 +/- 54.4 minutes, respectively. Cannulation sites were: ascending aorta (52.6 %), femoral artery (47.4 %), femoral vein (94.8 %) and right atrium (5.2 %). Myocardial protection was obtained by selective coronary osteal cold crystalloid cardioplegia and systemic cooling (mean 26.2 +/- 4 degrees C). Average intubation time was 1.5 +/- 1.4 days. Mean intensive care unit stay and postoperative hospital stay was 2.9 +/- 2.6 and 12.9 +/- 5.7 days, respectively. Median chest tube output was 550 ml. There were 4 revisions for bleeding. There were 2 late deaths and one non-incision related hospital death (5 %). This patient, who was already being treated for chronic dialysis, died on day 22 due to a cerebrovascular accident.
CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement is feasible as a reoperative procedure. Its major advantage is avoidance of cardiac reexposure with potential damage to coronary grafts. We think this technique deserves more widespread application.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17629860     DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-965283

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Thorac Cardiovasc Surg        ISSN: 0171-6425            Impact factor:   1.827


  4 in total

Review 1.  Is a minimally invasive approach for re-operative aortic valve replacement superior to standard full resternotomy?

Authors:  Andrés M Pineda; Orlando Santana; Gervasio A Lamas; Joseph Lamelas
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2012-05-07

2.  Minimally invasive primary aortic valve surgery: the OLV Aalst experience.

Authors:  Johan van der Merwe; Filip Casselman; Bernard Stockman; Frank Van Praet; Roel Beelen; Lieven Maene; Yvette Vermeulen; Ivan Degrieck
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2015-03

Review 3.  Minimally invasive reoperative aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kevin Phan; Jessie J Zhou; Nithya Niranjan; Marco Di Eusanio; Tristan D Yan
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2015-01

Review 4.  Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement in high risk patient groups.

Authors:  Daniel Fudulu; Harriet Lewis; Umberto Benedetto; Massimo Caputo; Gianni Angelini; Hunaid A Vohra
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 2.895

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.