Ravi K Ghanta1, Damien J Lapar1, John A Kern1, Irving L Kron1, Alan M Speir2, Edwin Fonner3, Mohammed Quader4, Gorav Ailawadi5. 1. Division of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va. 2. Cardiovascular and Thoracic Associates, Innova Heart and Vascular Institute, Falls Church, Va. 3. Virginia Cardiac Surgery Quality Initiative, Richmond, Va. 4. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Va. 5. Division of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va. Electronic address: gorav@virginia.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several single-center studies have reported excellent outcomes with minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (mini-AVR). Although criticized as requiring more operative time and complexity, mini-AVR is increasingly performed. We compared contemporary outcomes and cost of mini-AVR versus conventional AVR in a multi-institutional regional cohort. We hypothesized that mini-AVR provides equivalent outcomes to conventional AVR without increased cost. METHODS: Patient records for primary isolated AVR (2011-2013) were extracted from a regional, multi-institutional Society of Thoracic Surgeons database and stratified by conventional versus mini-AVR, performed by either partial sternotomy or right thoracotomy. To compare similar patients, a 1:1 propensity-matched cohort was performed after adjusting for surgeon; operative year; and Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score, including age and risk factors (n = 289 in each group). Differences in outcomes and cost were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 1341 patients underwent primary isolated AVR, of which 442 (33%) underwent mini-AVR at 17 hospitals. Mortality, stroke, renal failure, and other major complications were equivalent between groups. Mini-AVR was associated with decreased ventilator time (5 vs 6 hours; P = .04) and decreased blood product transfusion (25% vs 32%; P = .04). A greater percentage of mini-AVR patients were discharged within 4 days of the operation (15.2% vs 4.8%; P < .001). Consequently, total hospital costs were lower in the mini-AVR group ($36,348 vs $38,239; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Mortality and morbidity outcomes of mini-AVR are equivalent to conventional AVR. Mini-AVR is associated with decreased ventilator time, blood product use, early discharge, and reduced total hospital cost. In contemporary clinical practice, mini-AVR is safe and cost-effective.
BACKGROUND: Several single-center studies have reported excellent outcomes with minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (mini-AVR). Although criticized as requiring more operative time and complexity, mini-AVR is increasingly performed. We compared contemporary outcomes and cost of mini-AVR versus conventional AVR in a multi-institutional regional cohort. We hypothesized that mini-AVR provides equivalent outcomes to conventional AVR without increased cost. METHODS:Patient records for primary isolated AVR (2011-2013) were extracted from a regional, multi-institutional Society of Thoracic Surgeons database and stratified by conventional versus mini-AVR, performed by either partial sternotomy or right thoracotomy. To compare similar patients, a 1:1 propensity-matched cohort was performed after adjusting for surgeon; operative year; and Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score, including age and risk factors (n = 289 in each group). Differences in outcomes and cost were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 1341 patients underwent primary isolated AVR, of which 442 (33%) underwent mini-AVR at 17 hospitals. Mortality, stroke, renal failure, and other major complications were equivalent between groups. Mini-AVR was associated with decreased ventilator time (5 vs 6 hours; P = .04) and decreased blood product transfusion (25% vs 32%; P = .04). A greater percentage of mini-AVR patients were discharged within 4 days of the operation (15.2% vs 4.8%; P < .001). Consequently, total hospital costs were lower in the mini-AVR group ($36,348 vs $38,239; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Mortality and morbidity outcomes of mini-AVR are equivalent to conventional AVR. Mini-AVR is associated with decreased ventilator time, blood product use, early discharge, and reduced total hospital cost. In contemporary clinical practice, mini-AVR is safe and cost-effective.
Authors: Tomislav Mihaljevic; Lawrence H Cohn; Daniel Unic; Sary F Aranki; Gregory S Couper; John G Byrne Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: H E Mächler; P Bergmann; M Anelli-Monti; D Dacar; P Rehak; I Knez; L Salaymeh; E Mahla; B Rigler Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 1999-04 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: James M Brown; Sean M O'Brien; Changfu Wu; Jo Ann H Sikora; Bartley P Griffith; James S Gammie Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Paolo Berretta; Mariano Cefarelli; Walter Vessella; Michele D Pierri; Roberto Carozza; Giulia Abramucci; Christopher Munch; Hossein M Zahedi; Marco Di Eusanio Journal: J Vis Surg Date: 2018-05-08
Authors: Emmanuel Villa; Margherita Dalla Tomba; Antonio Messina; Andrea Trenta; Federico Brunelli; Marco Cirillo; Zean Mhagna; Giovanni Alfonso Chiariello; Giovanni Troise Journal: Cardiol J Date: 2018-09-20 Impact factor: 2.737
Authors: Kei Woldendorp; Mathew P Doyle; Paul G Bannon; Martin Misfeld; Tristan D Yan; Giuseppe Santarpino; Paolo Berretta; Marco Di Eusanio; Bart Meuris; Alfredo Giuseppe Cerillo; Pierluigi Stefàno; Niccolò Marchionni; Jacqueline K Olive; Tom C Nguyen; Marco Solinas; Giacomo Bianchi Journal: Ann Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2020-09
Authors: Domenico Paparella; Giuseppe Santarpino; Marco Moscarelli; Pietro Guida; Adriano De Santis; Khalil Fattouch; Luigi Martinelli; Roberto Coppola; Elisa Mikus; Alberto Albertini; Mauro Del Giglio; Renato Gregorini; Giuseppe Speziale Journal: Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg Date: 2021-07-26