Development and clinical application of minimally invasive cardiac surgery using percutaneous cardiopulmonary support.

OBJECTIVES: Optimal cardiopulmonary support during minimally invasive cardiac surgery remains controversial. We developed cardiopulmonary bypass for minimally invasive cardiac surgery using percutaneous peripheral cannulation. METHODS: Subjects were 34 patients (age: 58 +/- 13 years; range: 17-73) undergoing minimally invasive cardiac surgery using percutaneous cardiopulmonary support between June 1997 and March 1999. Procedures included atrial septal defect closure (n = 14), partial atrioventricular septal defect closure (n = 1), mitral valve replacement (n = 8), mitral valve repair (n = 3), aortic valve replacement (n = 6), coronary artery bypass grafting (n = 1), and right atrial myxoma extirpation (n = 1). Bicaval venous drainage from the right internal jugular vein and the femoral vein and arterial return to the femoral artery were instituted by percutaneous cannulation. Venous drainage was implemented by negative pressure (-20 to -40 mmHg) and arterial return was by conventional roller pump. All procedures were conducted through a skin incision 8 +/- 1 cm, from 6 to 10 cm and partial sternotomy. Aortic cross clamping and cardioplegic solution were administered in the surgical field. RESULTS: The operation lasted 224 +/- 45 min., cardiopulmonary bypass 104 +/- 32 min., and aortic clamping 77 +/- 23 min.. No deaths occurred. One patient with residual atrial septal defect required reoperation through the same skin incision. Only 1 patient required homologous blood transfusion. The average postoperative hospital stay was 15 +/- 5 days. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive cardiac surgery using percutaneous cardiopulmonary support is safe and an excellent option for selected patients affected by single valve lesion, simple cardiac anomalies, and coronary artery bypass grafting.     

Minimally invasive versus sternotomy approaches for mitral reconstruction: comparison of intermediate-term results

BACKGROUND: This study compares intermediate-term outcomes of mitral valve reconstruction after either the standard sternotomy approach or the new minimally invasive approach. Although minimally invasive mitral valve operations appear to offer certain advantages, such as reduced postoperative discomfort and decreased postoperative recovery time, the intermediate-term functional and echocardiographic efficacy has not yet been documented. METHODS: From May 1996 to February 1999, 100 consecutive patients underwent primary mitral reconstruction through a minimally invasive right anterior thoracotomy and peripheral cardiopulmonary bypass and Port-Access technology (Heartport, Inc, Redwood City, Calif). Outcomes were compared with those for our previous 100 patients undergoing primary mitral repair who were operated on with the standard sternotomy approach. RESULTS: Although patients were similar in age, the patients undergoing the minimally invasive approach had a lower preoperative New York Heart Association classification (2.1 +/- 0.5 vs 2.6 +/- 0.6, P <.001). There was one (1.0%) hospital mortality with the sternotomy approach and no such case with the minimally invasive approach. Follow-up revealed that residual mitral insufficiency was similar between the minimally invasive and sternotomy approaches (0.79 +/- 0.06 vs 0.77 +/- 0.06, P =.89, 0- to 3-point scale); likewise, the cumulative freedom from reoperation was not significantly different (94.4% vs 96.8%, P =.38). Follow-up New York Heart Association functional class was significantly better in the patients undergoing the minimally invasive approach (1.5 +/- 0.05 vs 1.2 +/- 0.05, P <.01). CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate comparable 1-year follow-up results after minimally invasive mitral valve reconstruction. Both echocardiographic results and New York Heart Association functional improvements were compatible with results achieved with the standard sternotomy approach. The minimally invasive approach for mitral valve reconstruction provides equally durable results with marked advantages for the patient and should be more widely adopted.     

Minimally invasive video-assisted mitral valve surgery: from Port-Access towards a totally endoscopic procedure

Right thoracotomy is an alternative to mid-sternotomy for left atrium access. The Port-Access approach is an option that reduces the skin incision and obviates rib spreading. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From February 1997 until November 1999, 121 patients underwent mitral valve surgery through a right antero-lateral thoracotomy using the Heartport cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) system. Mean age was 60 years (31-84). Most patients had normal ejection fractions and were in NYHA Class II or III. Seventy-five patients had valve repair (62%) and 46 (38%) had valve replacement. Pathologies were myxoid (n = 80), rheumatic (n = 30), chronic endocarditis (n = 5), annular dilatation (n = 3), sclerotic (n = 1), ingrowing myxoma (n = 1), and one closure of a paravalvular leak. RESULTS: Two patients had conversion to sternotomy for aortic dissection (one died) with the Endo-Aortic Clamp, and two others for peripheral vascular problems. One patient died at postoperative day 1 after reoperation for failed repair, another with double valve surgery on postoperative day 4 after two revisions for bleeding. Twelve underwent revision for bleeding (10%). Three had prolonged ICU stay for respiratory insufficiency. Two late valve replacements for endocarditis occurred. Echographic control revealed residual insufficiencies (grade 1-2) in two valvular repairs. There were neither paravalvular leaks nor myocardial infarcts. There were no cerebrovascular accidents due to embolic phenomena. Mean ICU and hospital stay were 2.1 and 8.7 days, with a major difference between the first 30 patients and those who followed. CONCLUSION: Port-Access mitral valve surgery can be a valid alternative to conventional sternotomy and seems to be an important improvement in minimally invasive cardiac surgery.     

Robotic minimally invasive mitral valve reconstruction yields less blood product transfusion and shorter length of stay

BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted minimally invasive mitral valve reconstruction has gained popularity recently. Initial reports suggest that this approach can be used with relative safety and efficacy. Direct comparisons with a traditional sternotomy approach have not yet been explored extensively. METHODS: All mitral valve procedures that were performed by a single surgeon during a 3-year period of time were analyzed (n = 142 procedures). Patients whose condition required concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting or aortic valve surgery were excluded subsequently from analysis, because all of these patients were approached obligatorily by sternotomy (n = 71 patients). Six patients underwent right thoracotomy mitral valve procedures without robotic assistance, and 1 patient in cardiogenic shock underwent emergent mitral valve reconstruction by sternotomy. Of the remaining 64 patients who were eligible theoretically for sternotomy or robotic-assisted minimally invasive surgery, 39 patients underwent sternotomy, and 25 patients underwent right chest minimally invasive robotic-assisted surgery. Randomization between these 2 approaches would be almost impossible in the United States. The primary determinant for the choice of approach was request of the referring physician or patient. Multiple perioperative outcomes were then compared. RESULTS: Patients who underwent sternotomy and robotic-assisted surgery exhibited equivalent preoperative characteristics and experienced an equivalent degree of correction of mitral regurgitation in repairs and in need for replacement. Complex mitral valve repairs that entailed leaflet resection and reapproximation, annular plication, sliding annuloplasty, chordal transfer, and GoreTex neochordal construction were accomplished successfully with the robotic system. Cross-clamp and bypass times were longer for patients in the minimally invasive group (110 vs 151 minutes; P = .0015; 162 vs 239 minutes; P < .001, respectively). Mean packed red blood cell transfusion was lower among patients who underwent robotic-assisted surgery (5.0 vs 2.8 units; P = .04). Patients who underwent robotic-assisted surgeries experienced shorter mean duration of postoperative hospitalization (10.6 vs 7.1 days; P = .04). There was 1 death among the patients who underwent sternotomy, and no deaths among the patients who underwent robotic-assisted surgery. CONCLUSION: Patients can undergo mitral valve reconstruction with minimally invasive robotic assistance, avoid a sternotomy, require less blood product transfusion, and experience shorter hospitalization.     

Minimally invasive reoperative isolated valve surgery: early and mid-term results

OBJECTIVE: Minimally invasive, nonsternotomy approaches for valve procedures may reduce the risks associated with cardiac surgery after prior sternotomy and may improve outcomes. We analyzed our institutional experience to test this hypothesis. METHODS: Between 1995 and 2002, 498 patients with previous cardiac operations via sternotomy underwent isolated valve surgery: 337 via median sternotomy (aortic = 160; mitral = 177) and 161 via mini-thoracotomy (aortic = 61; mitral = 100). Data were collected prospectively using the New York State Cardiac Surgery Report Form. RESULTS: Preoperative incidences of congestive heart failure, renal disease, and nonelective procedures were higher in the sternotomy group. Hospital mortality was significantly lower with the minimally invasive approach, 5.6% (9/161) versus 11.3% (38/337) (univariate, p = 0.04). However, multivariate analysis (odds ratio: 95% confidence intervals, p value) revealed that chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (6.6: 1.4 to 3.1, p = 0.001), renal disease (4.1: 1.52 to 11.2, p = 0.01), cerebrovascular disease (2.2: 1.03 to 4.78, p = 0.04), and ejection faction <30% (1.5: 0.96 to 5.5, p = 0.06) were associated with increased mortality. While mean bypass time, cross-clamp times, and stroke rates were comparable between groups, patients undergoing minimally invasive valve surgery had no deep wound infections (0% vs 2.4%, p = 0.05), less need for blood products (p = 0.02), and shorter hospital stays (p = 0.009). Five-year survival was higher with minimally invasive techniques as compared to a sternotomy approach (92.4 +/- 2% and 86.0 +/- 2%, respectively, p = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Reoperative valve surgery can be safely performed using a nonsternotomy, minimally invasive approach, with at least equal mortality, less hospital morbidity, decreased hospital length of stay, and slightly favorable mid-term survival as compared to sternotomy.     

Mini-Reoperative Mitral Valve Surgery

BACKGROUND: Reoperative surgery involving the atrioventricular valves places the patient at risk for cardiac or bypass graft injury upon reoperative sternotomy. Standard right thoracotomy can avoid these problems but is associated with a large incision and possibly more pulmonary complications. METHODS AND RESULTS: An alternative, minimally invasive approach for reoperative atrioventricular valve surgery was studied in 22 patients. Patient age was 66 +/- 10 years. Postoperative mitral regurgitation was 3.4 +/- 0.3 and New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class was III/IV, despite a mean ejection fraction of 44 +/- 14%. These patients had 1-4 prior procedures a mean of 5 years previously. An anterior 5th interspace incision of 5- to 10-cm was performed. A 1-cm segment of 5th rib was removed to facilitate exposure. Cardiopulmonary bypass was performed via ascending aorta or femoral artery cannula and bicaval venous cannulae. Systemic cooling (25 degrees) and fibrillatory arrest was used. Operations performed included mitral valve repair (12), mitral valve replacement (5), prosthetic mitral valve rereplacement (4), repair of perivalvular leak (3), tricuspid valve repair (5), and atrial septal defect closures (7). Mean bypass time was 109 +/- 21 minutes with a mean fibrillatory time of 62 +/- 12 minutes. There was no intraoperative or 30-day mortality. Patients were weaned from ventilation at a mean of 5 hours postoperatively and received 1.3 +/- 1 unit of blood. There were no wound complications or re-explorations for bleeding. At a mean follow-up of 15 +/- 8 months, survivors are NYHA Class I-II. When interviewed, all patients felt their recovery was more rapid and less painful than their original sternotomy. CONCLUSION: This minimally invasive approach to reoperative atrioventricular valve surgery is safe and technically feasible. It has become our preferred approach to the atrioventricular valves in patients with a previous sternotomy.     

微创心脏瓣膜替换术73例报告

目的介绍一种微创心脏瓣膜替换术的新方法。方法于１９９７年３月至１９９８年４月为７３例瓣膜患者经右侧腋下胸部小切口,皮切口平均长度为（８５±０９）ｃｍ,进行了心脏瓣膜替换手术。结果平均循环阻断时间（８８６±３３８）分钟,平均转机（１１７０±４５９）分钟,有５例患者未阻断升主动脉,室颤下完成了二尖瓣替换术。术后气管插管时间（９６±３６）小时,平均胸液引流量（２６４５±１８４３）ｍｌ。１例患者院内死于脑出血。随诊中２例患者出现感染性心内膜炎,其中１例患者死亡。其他随诊良好。结论微创心脏瓣膜替换术安全可靠,可减少手术对患者的影响,利于患者恢复,同时为换瓣手术技术的改进提供了新经验。     

Minimally invasive technology for mitral valve surgery via left thoracotomy: experience with forty cases

BACKGROUND: Recent evolution of minimally invasive technology has expanded the application of the right thoracotomy approach for mitral valve surgery. These same technological advances have also made the left posterior minithoracotomy approach attractive in complex mitral procedures. METHODS: From 1996 to 2003, 921 isolated mitral valve procedures were performed without sternotomy; 40 (4.3%) of these were performed via left posterior minithoracotomy. In the left posterior minithoracotomy group, ages ranged from 18 to 84 years; 36 patients had had previous cardiac surgery (9 on > or =2 occasions). Other factors precluding right thoracotomy included mastectomy/radiation and pectus excavatum. RESULTS: Arterial perfusion was via femoral artery (n = 26) or descending aorta (n = 14); long femoral venous cannulas with vacuum-assisted drainage were used in 39 procedures. Two patients had direct aortic crossclamping, 18 had hypothermic fibrillation, and 20 had balloon endoaortic occlusion. The mean crossclamp and bypass times were 81.9 and 117.2 minutes, respectively. Hospital mortality was 5.0% (2/40); both deaths occurred in octogenarians. There were no injuries to bypass grafts or conversions to sternotomy. Complications included perioperative stroke (2/40; 5.0%), bleeding (2/40; 5.0%), and respiratory failure (1/40; 2.5%); 28 patients (70%) had no postoperative complications. There was no incidence of perioperative myocardial infarction, renal failure, sepsis, or wound infection. The median length of stay was 7 days. CONCLUSIONS: Advances in minimally invasive cardiac surgery technology are readily adaptable to a left-sided minithoracotomy approach to the mitral valve. The left posterior minithoracotomy approach is a valuable option in complicated reoperative mitral procedures with acceptable perioperative morbidity and mortality.     

Repair of partial atrioventricular septal defect through a minimal right vertical infra-axillary thoracotomy

OBJECTIVE: To report a new minimally invasive and cosmetic approach for partial atrioventricular septal defect (PAVSD) repair. METHODS: From November 1997 to January 2000, six patients with a mean age of 19.2 +/- 7.7 years underwent minimal right vertical infra-axillary thoracotomy for PAVSD repair. Left atrioventricular (AV) valve regurgitation was assessed on the beating heart before and after valvuloplasty. Commissuroplasty of the left AV valve and atrial septum repair were done in all patients. RESULTS: There were no operative or late mortality, and no morbidity directly related to the thoracotomy approach. The average length of the incision was 8.3 +/- 131 cm. The arrest times averaged 32.8 +/- 8.3 minutes, and the cardiopulmonary bypass times averaged 66.0 +/- 9.0 minutes. One patient had a mild to moderate left AV valve regurgitation postoperatively. All patients were free of symptoms during the follow-up. CONCLUSION: The minimal right vertical infra-axillary thoracotomy is a safer, more cosmetic and less invasive approach than median sternotomy for the repair of PAVSD.     

Minimally invasive approach for redo mitral valve surgery: a true benefit for the patient

OBJECTIVES: Redo mitral valve surgery via sternotomy is associated with a substantial morbidity and mortality. This study evaluated a minimally invasive technique for mitral valve redo procedures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Out of a series of 394 patients undergoing mitral valve repair or replacement via a right minithoracotomy, 39 patients underwent redo mitral valve surgery (59+/-13 years, 23 female). Previous cardiac surgeries included 17 patients with mitral valve repair, 6 patients with mitral valve replacement, 3 patients with aortic valve replacement, 2 patients with atrial septal defect closure, and 11 patients with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). In all cases, femoro-femoral cannulation was performed. The port access technique was applied in patients undergoing redo valve surgery. In patients with prior CABG, the operation was performed using deep hypothermia and ventricular fibrillation. RESULTS: In all cases, sternotomy was avoided. The mitral valve was replaced in 20 patients and repaired in 19. Time of surgery and cross-clamp time were comparable with the overall series (168+/-73 [redo] vs 168+/-58 min and 52+/-21 [redo] vs 58+/-25 min). Mortality was 5.1%. One patient had transient hemiplegia due to the migration of the endoclamp. All other patients had uneventful outcomes and normal mitral valve function at 3-month's follow-up. CONCLUSION: Redo mitral valve surgery can be performed safely using a minimally invasive approach in patients with a previous sternotomy. The right lateral minithoracotomy offers excellent exposure. It minimizes the need for cardiac dissection, and thus, the risk for injury. Avoiding a resternotomy increases patient comfort of redo mitral valve surgery.     

The micro-mitral operation comparing the Port-Access technique and the transthoracic clamp technique

BACKGROUND: Several minimally invasive approaches to the mitral valve have been described, including parasternal incision and right anterolateral thoracotomy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Since September 1996, 58 patients underwent minimally invasive mitral valve surgery at our institution through a right anterolateral minithoractomy. Two different techniques were used for institution of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and aortic clamping: in the Port-Access group (group A) patients had femoro-femoral cannulation with a special arterial cannula to introduce an endoaortic balloon clamp (n = 23). The second group (group B) of patients underwent femoro-femoral CPB as well in combination with a specially designed transthoracic aortic clamp (Chitwood technique, n = 35). Patients were assigned to either technique in a nonrandomized fashion. Demographics were similar in both groups. RESULTS: In group A, 4 valves were replaced, 19 patients had mitral valve repair. In group B, 7 patients had valve replacement and 28 patients underwent mitral repair. Four patients in group A were converted to Chitwood technique due to endoclamp dysfunction. Operating time, CPB time, cross-clamp time, and postoperative blood loss were lower in group B (operating time 295 +/- 83 min vs. 236 +/- 63.9 min; CPB min 167.6 = 64.9 min vs. 137.6 +/- 38.2 min; cross-clamp time 105.9 +/- 51.7 min vs. 78.9 +/- 25.2 min; postoperative blood loss 584 +/- 428 mL vs. 323 +/- 209 mL [p < 0.05]). Clinical outcome regarding postoperative mechanical ventilatilation time, hospital stay and hospital mortality was not different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive mitral valve procedures via right anterolateral minithoracotomy, including complex valve repair, can be performed successfully using either technique. However, the Chitwood technique provides better intraoperative handling with shorter operation time and less postoperative blood loss. Additionally, costs of a procedure are less using the Chitwood technique compared to the Port-Access technique.     

Superior trans‐septal approach for minimally invasive mitral valve surgery via right small thoracotomy

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS), despite its challenges, is not a rare procedure. However, MIMVS via a right small thoracotomy must be performed using long‐shafted surgical instruments and thoracotomy instruments specialized for minimally invasive cardiac surgeries. We have performed 12 cases of MIMVS via right small thoracotomy using the superior trans‐septal approach and secured a surgical visual field that easily allows a finger to reach the mitral valve annulus without using special instruments for minimally invasive cardiac surgery. We named this technique the “drawer‐case technique.” In conclusion, MIMVS via right thoracotomy using the superior trans‐septal approach can be performed easily and safely, similar to mitral valve surgery performed via median sternotomy.     

One thousand minimally invasive valve operations: early and late results

OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the potential benefits of minimally invasive approaches for treatment of isolated aortic and mitral valve disease. METHODS: From 7/96 to 04/03, we performed 1000 minimally invasive valve operations: 526 aortic (AV) procedures (64 years; mean, 25-95) and 474 mitral (MV) procedures (58 years; mean, 17-90). RESULTS: In the AV group, an upper ministernotomy was used in 492/526 patients (93%) and a right parasternal approach in 34 (7%). Sixty-three patients had reoperative aortic valve replacements. In the MV group lower sternotomy was used in 260/474 (55%), right parasternal in 200/474 (42%), and a right thoracotomy in 14 patients. MV repair was performed in 416 and MV replacement in 58 patients. Operative mortality was 12/526 (2%) in the AV and 1/474 (0.2%) in the MV group. Freedom from reoperation at 6 years was 99% and 95% in the AV and MV group, respectively. Late mortality was 5% in the AV and 3% in the MV group, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive valve surgery can be performed at very low levels of morbidity and mortality, with results equal to or better than conventional techniques. All forms of valve repair and replacement operations can be performed. Long-term survival and freedom from reoperation are excellent.     

Endoscopic mitral valve repair: feasible,reproducible, and durable

OBJECTIVE: We sought to document the feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of performing mitral valve repair using a totally endoscopic approach. METHODS: Between February 1997 and October 1, 2001, 187 patients underwent totally endoscopic mitral valve repair at our institution. The mean age was 60.7 +/- 13.1 years, and 62% were male. Median preoperative functional class and degree of mitral regurgitation were II and 4, respectively. Data collection included an institutional protocol assessing procedure-related pain, cosmesis, and functional recovery. Statistical analysis included Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression methods. Mean follow-up was 19 +/- 15.2 months and was 100% complete. RESULTS: Associated atrial procedures were performed in 9.1% (n = 17) of the patients. Two patients required intraoperative conversion to sternotomy. Thoracoscopic re-evaluation for suspected bleeding (n = 19) was part of our aggressive postoperative management. One patient required sternotomy for control of bleeding. Hospital mortality included 1 (0.5%) patient and was not technology related. There were 1 early and 6 late reoperations, 4 of which were due to endocarditis. No risk factors for repair failure could be detected. Freedom from mitral valve reoperation at 4 years was 93.3% +/- 2.6%. The median degree of mitral regurgitation at follow-up was 0. Ninety-three percent of the patients were highly satisfied with either no or mild postoperative pain, and 98.4% believed they had an aesthetically pleasing scar. CONCLUSIONS: Totally endoscopic mitral valve repair can be done safely with excellent results and a high degree of patient satisfaction. It is now our exclusive approach for isolated atrioventricular valve disease.     

Evolution of mitral valve surgery: toward a totally endoscopic approach

BACKGROUND: Our study evaluates a series of video-assisted minimally invasive mitral operations, showing safe progression toward totally endoscopic techniques. METHODS: Consecutive patients with isolated mitral valve disease underwent either manually directed (n = 55) or voice-activated robotically directed (n = 72) video-assisted mitral operations. Cold blood cardioplegia, a transthoracic aortic clamp, a 5-mm endoscope, and a 5-cm minithoracotomy were used. This video-assisted minimally invasive mitral operation cohort was compared with a previous sternotomy-based mitral operation cohort (n = 100). RESULTS: Group demographics, New York Heart Association classification, and cardiac function were similar. Repairs were performed in 61.8% manually directed (n = 34), 75.0% robotically directed (n = 54), and 54% sternotomy-based (N = 54) mitral operations. The robotically directed technique showed a significant decrease in blood loss, ventilator time, and hospitalization compared with the sternotomy-based technique. Manually directed mitral operations compared with robotically directed mitral operations had decreased arrest times (128.0 +/- 4.5 minutes compared with 90.0 +/- 4.6 minutes; p < 0.001) and decreased perfusion times (173.0 +/- 5.7 minutes compared with 144.0 +/- 4.6 minutes; p < 0.001). In the minimally invasive mitral operation cohort, complications included reexploration for bleeding (2.4%; n = 3) and one stroke (0.8%), whereas the 30-day mortality was 2.3% (n = 3). CONCLUSIONS: Video-assisted mitral surgery provides safe and effective results when compared with conventional sternal approaches. These positive results show a safe and stepwise evolution toward a totally endoscopic mitral valve operation.     

Current indications for left thoracotomy in coronary revascularization and valvular procedures

BACKGROUND: Left thoracotomy is infrequently used for cardiac procedures, but its application in reoperative and minimally invasive coronary revascularization and in valvular procedures has been reported recently. METHODS: Three case reports and a review of the current literature illustrate the unique benefits of this approach for myocardial revascularization and valve replacement. RESULTS: Reoperative coronary revascularization of the left anterior descending and circumflex coronary arteries was performed off-pump via a left posterolateral thoracotomy. For the second case, this approach was used for coronary artery bypass grafting of the right coronary and left anterior descending arteries with femoral-femoral cardiopulmonary bypass in a patient with congestive heart failure and coronary artery disease who also required closure of a patent ductus arteriosus. In the third case, mitral valve replacement using femoral venous and aortic cannulation for cardiopulmonary bypass was performed via a left thoracotomy to avoid a retrosternal gastric conduit in a patient with severe mitral stenosis and congestive heart failure. All patients returned to normal activity and are asymptomatic. CONCLUSIONS: These case reports and a comprehensive review of the literature demonstrate the utility of left thoracotomy as an alternative approach to standard median sternotomy in selected cases of revascularization and valvular procedures.     

Routine minimally invasive aortic valve procedures

BACKGROUND: Due to the lack of objective evidence supporting the advantages and early technical difficulties, minimally invasive aortic valve procedures were performed on a highly selective rather than routine basis. METHODS: From September 1997 to February 1999, one surgeon routinely used upper or transverse minimally invasive sternotomy to perform 46 consecutive cases of aortic valve procedures (M), whereas two other surgeons performed 40 aortic valve procedures through a conventional sternotomy (C). RESULTS: More time consuming and technically demanding surgeries were done in M. There was one death in each group. Aortic clamp time was longer in M (93+/-40 vs 59+/-24 min, P=0.001). There were no differences in operating time, pump time, intubation duration, bleeding and intensive care unit stay. The advantages of minimally invasive aortic valve operation included better postoperative ejection fraction (58+/-17 vs 51+/-10%, P=0.04), decreased pain score (3+/-2 vs 5+/-2, P=0.004), less transfusion (19 vs 55%, P=0.02), shorter duration of chest tube drainage, and cosmetically more acceptable surgical wound (6.8+/-2.2 vs 5.2+/-2.0, P=0.018). From our series, we could not find any negative effects of minimal access surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that aortic valve surgeries could be performed routinely by the minimally invasive approach with a high degree of effectiveness and safety.     

Video-assisted Port-Access mitral valve surgery: from debut to routine surgery. Will Trocar-Port-Access cardiac surgery ultimately lead to robotic cardiac surgery?

A right thoracotomy is a well-known alternative for midsternotomy to have access to the left atrium. The Port-Access (Heartport, Inc, Redwood City, CA) approach is an invaluable option to avoid cracking of ribs and cartilage. EndoCPB (Heartport, Inc) and Endo-Aortic Clamp (Heartport, Inc) allows installation of the extracorporeal circulation and cardiac arrest from the groin. Videoassistance and shafted instruments help the surgeon to perform the surgery through a 5 x 2-cm port and fulfill the main goals of minimally invasive cardiac surgery, comfort, cosmesis, and fast rehabilitation. From February 1997 to November 1998, 75 patients (40 men/35 women) had either Port-Access mitral valve repair (n = 41) or replacement (n = 33) for a variety of reasons: myxoid degeneration (n = 45), rheumatic disease (n = 21), chronic endocarditis (n = 4), annular dilatation (n = 2), and sclerotic disease (n = 2). One valve was replaced because of an ingrowing myxoma. There was one closure of a paravalvular leak. The mean age was 59.3 years of age (range, 32 to 83 years). Most patients had normal ejection fractions but different grades of mitral valve insufficiency and were in NYHA class II. One 71-year-old patient died after reoperation on postoperative day 1 for failed repair. Two patients had conversion to sternotomy and conventional ECC for repair of a dissected aorta. One patient died, one patient suffered a minor cerebrovascular deficit. Three patients had prolonged intensive care unit (ICU) stays for respiratory insufficiency, 5 patients underwent revision for bleeding. Mean ICU stay was 2.5 days; and mean hospital stay, 9 days (range, 4 to 36). A significant difference between the first 30 and last 38 patients in terms of length of stay in the ICU and the hospital was noticed. Two late mitral valve replacements for chronic endocarditis after repair occurred. One patient had medical therapy for endocarditis after mitral valve replacement. The debut of Port-Access mitral valve surgery may be nerve-racking; the routine is a smooth and sure surgery with maximum comfort, a very discrete scar, and a fast rehabilitation. There were no paravalvular leakages nor myocardial infarctions. Cerebrovascular accidents owing to thromboembolic phenomena, vascular lower limb or wound complications were not seen. Port-Access mitral valve surgery is a very important investment in the future of cardiac surgery. Some learning curve pitfalls were associated with the process of starting this revolutionary technique.     

Robotic-assisted instruments enhance minimally invasive mitral valve surgery

BACKGROUND: The potential for totally endoscopic mitral valve surgery has been advanced by the development of minimally invasive techniques. Recently surgical robots have offered instrument access through small ports, obviating the need for a significant thoracotomy. This study tested the hypothesis that a microsurgical robot with 5 degrees of freedom is capable of performing an endoscopic mitral valve replacement (MVR). METHODS: Dogs (n = 6) were placed on peripheral cardiopulmonary bypass; aortic occlusion was achieved with endoaortic clamping and transesophageal echocardiographic control. A small left seventh interspace "service entrance" incision was used to insert sutures, retractor blade, and valve prosthesis. Robotically controlled instruments included a thoracoscope and 5-mm needle holders. MVR was performed using an interrupted suture technique. RESULTS: Excellent visualization was achieved with the thoracoscope. Instrument setup required 25.8 minutes (range 12 to 37); valve replacement required 69.3+/-5.39 minutes (range 48 to 78). MVR was accomplished with normal prosthetic valve function and without misplaced sutures or inadvertent injuries. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the feasibility of adjunctive use of robotic instrumentation for minimally invasive MVR. Clinical trials are indicated.     

Robotic mammary artery harvest and anastomotic device allows minimally invasive mitral valve repair and coronary bypass

Abstract   We report the case of a 60-year-old man requiring combined mitral valve repair and coronary artery bypass grafting. A unique minimally invasive approach was used combining robotic internal mammary artery harvesting, partial lower sternotomy, and single vessel coronary artery bypass grafting using an automated distal coronary artery anastomotic device. Issues in approaching the commonly encountered patient with mitral valve disease and coronary artery disease using minimally invasive techniques are discussed.