Literature DB >> 21854091

J-shaped versus median sternotomy for aortic valve replacement with minimal extracorporeal circuit.

Alaaddin Yilmaz1, Jelena Sjatskig, Wim J van Boven, Frans G Waanders, Johannes C Kelder, Uday Sonker, Geoffrey T L Kloppenburg.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Minimal access aortic valve replacement (AVR) has been demonstrated to have beneficial effects over median sternotomy. Minimal extracorporeal circulation (MECC) has been shown to have less deleterious effects than conventional cardiopulmonary bypass. We describe for the first time AVR via upper J-shaped partial sternotomy compared to median sternotomy using MECC.
METHODS: Prospectively collected pre-operative, intra-operative, post-operative and follow-up data from 104 consecutive patients who underwent minimal access AVR were compared to 72 consecutive patients undergoing median sternotomy using MECC during the same period (January 2007 to December 2009).
RESULTS: No significant differences were found in patient's characteristics or intra-operative data with the exception of pre-existing pulmonary disease. The mean cardiopulmonary bypass (86 ± 18 min vs. 78 ± 15 min, p = 0.0079) and cross-clamp times (65 ± 13 min vs. 59 ± 12 min, p = 0.0013) were significantly shorter in the median sternotomy group. Mediastinal blood loss (397 ± 257 ml vs. 614 ± 339 ml, p < 0.0001) and ventilation time (8 ± 6.9 h vs. 11 ± 16.5 h, p = 0.0054) were significantly less in the minimal access group. No differences were seen in transfusion requirements, inotropic support, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, total hospital stay, post-operative haemoglobin drop, major events or mortality. Quality of life scores after discharge demonstrated less pain with a quicker recovery and return to daily activities in patients receiving J-shaped sternotomy.
CONCLUSIONS: Minimal access AVR using MECC is feasible and provides excellent clinical results. Less pain and quicker recovery was experienced among patients in this group.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21854091     DOI: 10.3109/14017431.2011.604875

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Scand Cardiovasc J        ISSN: 1401-7431            Impact factor:   1.589


  3 in total

1.  Mini-aortic valve replacements are not associated with an increased incidence of patient-prosthesis mismatch: a propensity-scored analysis.

Authors:  J Trent Magruder; Joshua C Grimm; Arman Kilic; Todd Crawford; John V Conte; Duke E Cameron; Ashish S Shah
Journal:  Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2015-12-19

2.  Comparing quality of life and postoperative pain after limited access and conventional aortic valve replacement: Design and rationale of the LImited access aortic valve replacement (LIAR) trial.

Authors:  Idserd D G Klop; Bart P van Putte; Geoffrey T L Kloppenburg; Mirjam A G Sprangers; Pythia T Nieuwkerk; Patrick Klein
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials Commun       Date:  2021-01-12

3.  Efficacy of Aortic Valve Replacement through Full Sternotomy and Minimal Invasion (Ministernotomy).

Authors:  Hammad M A Aliahmed; Rimantas Karalius; Arūnas Valaika; Arimantas Grebelis; Palmyra Semėnienė; Rasa Čypienė
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2018-04-28       Impact factor: 2.430

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.