Literature DB >> 25757476

Full sternotomy versus right anterior minithoracotomy for isolated aortic valve replacement in octogenarians: a propensity-matched study †.

Daniyar Gilmanov1, Pier Andrea Farneti2, Matteo Ferrarini2, Filippo Santarelli2, Michele Murzi2, Antonio Miceli2, Marco Solinas2, Mattia Glauber2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) is increasingly performed in elderly patients with good perioperative outcomes and long-term survival, resulting in significant health-related quality-of-life benefits. This study aimed to evaluate the outcome of patients aged ≥ 80 years undergoing isolated AVR through a right anterior minithoracotomy (RAMT) and compare it with a full sternotomy (FS).
METHODS: Two hundred and eighty-three elderly patients aged 80 years or more underwent isolated AVR between February 2001 and September 2013. With propensity score matching (1 : 1), the outcomes of patients having minimally invasive surgery (RAMT) were compared with those in whom the FS approach had been employed (100 vs 100 patients). TAVRs and partial sternotomy cases were excluded from the analysis.
RESULTS: There were two conversions in the RAMT group. Operative times did not significantly differ in the two groups. Patients in the RAMT group received a larger-sized prosthesis (P < 0.001) and were more likely to receive sutureless valves (P < 0.001). Shorter time for extubation (P < 0.001) and shorter hospital length of stay (P = 0.005) were observed in the RAMT group. Zero vs 4 (4.0%) (P = 0.043) patients had postoperative stroke and 2 (2.0%) vs zero (P = 0.16) had a transient ischaemic attack in the RAMT versus FS group, respectively. We registered the same rate of permanent pacemaker implant (P = 0.47) and that of new-onset atrial fibrillation (P = 0.28) for both groups. Six patients died, with no significant difference for in-hospital mortality (P = 0.68). No variable had a statistically significant predictive value for in-hospital mortality. RAMT patients were more likely to be discharged home directly or via rehabilitation (P = 0.031). FS, along with four other factors, independently predicted longer hospital stay. Though the median follow-up duration was longer in the FS group (59 vs 24 months, P < 0.001), the two groups had similar survival rates at 5 years (80 vs 81%, P = 0.37). Ten factors were associated with long-term survival by Cox regression analysis, and RAMT had no statistical impact (P = 0.38).
CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive AVR through right anterior minithoracotomy can be safely performed in patients aged ≥80 years with acceptable morbidity and mortality rates. It is an expeditious and effective alternative to full sternotomy AVR and might be associated with lower postoperative stroke incidence, earlier extubation and shorter hospital stay.
© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Aortic valve replacement; Biological heart valve prosthesis; Minimally invasive surgery; Outcomes; Statistics, propensity matching

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25757476     DOI: 10.1093/icvts/ivv030

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg        ISSN: 1569-9285


  9 in total

Review 1.  The Opportunities and Limitations of Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery.

Authors:  Torsten Doenst; Mahmoud Diab; Christoph Sponholz; Michael Bauer; Gloria Färber
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2017-11-17       Impact factor: 5.594

2.  Aortic valve replacement using stented or sutureless/rapid deployment prosthesis via either full-sternotomy or a minimally invasive approach: a network meta-analysis.

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

Review 3.  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

Review 4.  Surgical treatment of elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis in the modern era - review.

Authors:  Anna Kwiecień; Tomasz Hrapkowicz; Krzysztof Filipiak; Roman Przybylski; Marcin Kaczmarczyk; Anetta Kowalczuk; Marian Zembala
Journal:  Kardiochir Torakochirurgia Pol       Date:  2018-09-24

Review 5.  Recent advances in aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  Cristiano Spadaccio; Khalid Alkhamees; Nawwar Al-Attar
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2019-07-22

Review 6.  Does minimal invasive cardiac surgery reduce the incidence of post-operative atrial fibrillation?

Authors:  Maria Maimari; Nikolaos G Baikoussis; Stelios Gaitanakis; Anna Dalipi-Triantafillou; Andreas Katsaros; Charilaos Kantsos; Vasileios Lozos; Konstantinos Triantafillou
Journal:  Ann Card Anaesth       Date:  2020 Jan-Mar

Review 7.  Minimally invasive aortic valve surgery.

Authors:  Lorenzo Di Bacco; Antonio Miceli; Mattia Glauber
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2021-03       Impact factor: 2.895

8.  Aortic Valve Replacement Via Right Anterior Mini-Thoracotomy: the Conventional Procedure Performed Through a Smaller Incision.

Authors:  Gabriele Tamagnini; Raoul Biondi; Mauro Del Giglio
Journal:  Braz J Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2021-02-01

Review 9.  Frailty and Exercise Training: How to Provide Best Care after Cardiac Surgery or Intervention for Elder Patients with Valvular Heart Disease.

Authors:  Egle Tamuleviciute-Prasciene; Kristina Drulyte; Greta Jurenaite; Raimondas Kubilius; Birna Bjarnason-Wehrens
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2018-09-13       Impact factor: 3.411

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.