Literature DB >> 28040763

Feasibility and clinical outcome after minimally invasive valve-sparing aortic root replacement.

Kristina Wachter1, Ulrich F W Franke1, Rashmi Yadav2, Ragi Nagib1, Adrian Ursulescu1, Samir Ahad1, Hardy Baumbach1.   

Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to examine the feasibility and clinical course after minimally invasive David procedure compared with those via a conventional median sternotomy.
Methods: One hundred and ninety-two consecutive patients who underwent elective valve-sparing aortic root replacement (David procedure) with or without additional cusp repair for aortic regurgitation ( n  = 17, 8.9%), dilatation of the aortic root ( n  = 95, 49.5%) or a combination of both pathologies ( n  = 80, 41.7%) were included. Patients with systemic disorders, such as Marfan's syndrome, and emergency cases were excluded. Assessment of quality of life was performed by modified Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) questionnaire. To minimize baseline differences, a matched pair analysis was conducted.
Results: One hundred and seventeen patients (60.9%) received a minimally invasive hemisternotomy (Group 1), 75 patients a conventional median sternotomy (39.1%, Group 2). Patients of Group 1 were significantly younger (56.5 ± 13.6 vs 64.8 ± 11.6, P  < 0.001). Understandably, concomitant cardiac procedures were more frequent in Group 2 ( n  = 7 [6.0%] vs n  = 48 [64.0%], P  < 0.001). In hospital, mortality was 0.9% in Group 1 (1/117) and 2.7% in Group 2 (2/75; P  = 0.562). Blood loss was significantly less in Group 1 (542.6 ± 441.8 vs 996.7 ± 822.6 ml, P  < 0.001). Duration of mechanical ventilation (10.2 ± 21.8 vs 26.9 ± 109.0 h, P  < 0.001) and ICU-stay (1.9 ± 3.6 vs 3.2 ± 5.6 days, P  < 0.001) were significantly shorter in the minimally invasive group, but this differences did not remain after matching. According to SF-36 questionnaire, patients in the minimally invasive group tend to have a higher quality of life. Conclusions: Minimally invasive valve-sparing aortic root replacement can be done safely via an upper partial sternotomy in experienced hands even if additional cusp repair is required.
© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Aortic aneurysm; Aortic valve insufficiency; Minimally invasive surgical procedures; Quality of life; Thoracic

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28040763     DOI: 10.1093/icvts/ivw362

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


  4 in total

1.  Surgical outcomes associated with partial upper sternotomy in obese aortic disease patients.

Authors:  Zeng-Rong Luo; Yi-Xing Chen; Liang-Wan Chen
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2022-05-31       Impact factor: 1.522

2.  Minimally invasive versus conventional surgery of the ascending aorta and root: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Tom A Rayner; Sean Harrison; Paul Rival; Dominic E Mahoney; Massimo Caputo; Gianni D Angelini; Jelena Savović; Hunaid A Vohra
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2020-01-01       Impact factor: 4.191

3.  Minimally invasive approach: is this the future of aortic surgery?

Authors:  Paolo Berretta; Michele Galeazzi; Mariano Cefarelli; Jacopo Alfonsi; Veronica De Angelis; Michele Danilo Pierri; Sacha M L Matteucci; Eugenio Alessandroni; Carlo Zingaro; Filippo Capestro; Alessandro D'Alfonso; Marco Di Eusanio
Journal:  Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2021-12-06

4.  The mini-Bentall approach: Comparison with full sternotomy.

Authors:  Vishal N Shah; Maxwell F Kilcoyne; Meghan Buckley; Serge Sicouri; Konstadinos A Plestis
Journal:  JTCVS Tech       Date:  2021-01-27
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.