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.     

Beating Heart Video-Assisted Mitral Valve Surgery: A Useful Technique for High-Risk Patients

Abstract   Background: Beating-heart valve surgery through a sternotomy has been used as an excellent myocardial protection strategy in high risk patients. Minimally invasive approaches have reduced the trauma and enhanced the recovery of patients undergoing heart surgery. We hypothesized that high-risk patients undergoing mitral valve surgery will benefit from a combination of these two approaches. Methods: A 52-year-old male with dilated cardiomyopathy and left ventricular function of 15% was referred for surgery because of congestive heart failure. Results: Using a 4-cm right minithoracotomy and femoral cannulation for cardiopulmonary bypass, successful beating-heart video-assisted mitral valve repair was performed. The adequacy of myocardial protection was confirmed by absence of ischemic electrophysiologic changes. The patient was discharged home on the 6^th postoperative day. Conclusion: Beating-heart strategy can be combined with a minimally invasive approach in patients with severely reduced ventricular function, who require mitral valve surgery.     

Comparison of minithoracotomy and conventional sternotomy approaches for valve surgery

OBJECTIVE: To compare patients undergoing valve surgery through a minithoracotomy approach with a matched group undergoing conventional valve surgery. DESIGN: Control study. SETTING: University hospital, single center. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-one consecutive patients scheduled for valve surgery by minithoracotomy approach were matched with a similar group of patients operated on by the sternotomy approach. INTERVENTIONS: Criteria for matching included type of valve procedure (aortic valve replacement or mitral valve repair), age, surgeons, and left ventricular function. Two surgeons performed the surgical procedures. Perioperative care was standardized for all patients. Operative and postoperative data were recorded.MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The 41 pairs of patients were correctly matched, except for left ventricular function (n = 1). Twenty patients underwent mitral valve repair and 62 aortic valve replacement. Preoperative demographic data and clinical characteristics were similar in both groups. Cardiopulmonary bypass, aortic clamping, and surgery times were longer in the minithoracotomy group (p < 0.05). In 3 patients, the minithoracotomy approach had to be converted into a sternotomy during the surgical procedure for better visualization. Minithoracotomy patients had significantly increased postoperative total blood loss (p < 0.05). No difference was found between the groups for extubation time and intensive care or in-hospital lengths of stay. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that valve surgery is feasible in many cases through minithoracotomy. Nevertheless, this approach increases surgical complexity and in this comparative study no significant benefit was shown.     

Minimally invasive mitral surgery: mitral valve repair with a right-sided partial sternotomy

We describe our concept and the results of mitral valve repair using a right-sided partial sternotomy. We performed mitral valve repair using this method in 50 patients with severe MR between April 1997 and October 1998. In 10 patients in whom good exposure was not attained, we changed to the ordinary full-sternotomy or T-shaped partial sternotomyprocedure. Forty patients with good exposure underwent successful mitral valve repair. The sites of repair were anterior in 15 cases, posterior in 16, and both in 9. There was no mortality, and intraoperative TEE performed in all 40 patients revealed that all had trivial or no regurgitation. The right-sided partial sternotomy (open door method) is a safe and useful method for minimally invasive valve Surgery. A better quality of life compared with traditional median sternotomy can be ensured for patients undergoing minimally invasive cardiac surgery only when receive the best-quality Surgery is performed.     

Hemisternotomy approach for aortic and mitral valve surgery

After exploring several less invasive approaches for cardiac valve surgery, we have concluded that the partial upper sternotomy is the incision of choice for minimally invasive aortic and mitral valve surgery. From March 1997 to January 1999, 827 patients had cardiac valve surgery using this approach; 462 had mitral valve procedures and 365 had aortic valve procedures. Of those having mitral valve surgery, 87% had mitral valve repair. Aortic valve surgery included replacement with stented bioprostheses (38%), allografts (29%), and mechanical prostheses (10%); in addition, 23% had aortic valve repair. Operative mortality was 0.8%. Conversion to full sternotomy was necessary in 2.4%. Blood use was low with 80% of patients receiving no blood transfusions. We conclude that all primary mitral and aortic procedures can be accomplished safely via partial upper sternotomy.     

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.     

Reexamining contraindications for minimally invasive mitral valve surgery

Historically, contraindications to minimally invasive or robotic mitral valve surgery have included prior mastectomy, thoracic reconstruction, or chest radiation. However, we believe that by granting flexibility in the choice of skin incision site while performing careful dissection, surgeons can provide these patients the outstanding results afforded by a minithoracotomy. We present a patient who had undergone a prior mastectomy and radiation treatment in whom we performed a minimally invasive mitral valve repair through a right-sided minithoracotomy using the previous mastectomy incision.     

Minimally invasive cardiac valve surgery improves patient satisfaction while reducing costs of cardiac valve replacement and repair.

OBJECTIVE: This study compares the quality of valve replacement and repair performed through minimally invasive incisions as compared to the standard operation for aortic and mitral valve replacement. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: With the advent of minimally invasive laparoscopic approaches to orthopedic surgery, urology, general surgery, and thoracic surgery, it now is apparent that standard cardiac valve operations can be performed through very small incisions with similar approaches. METHODS: Eighty-four patients underwent minimally invasive aortic (n = 41) and minimally invasive mitral valve repair and replacement (n = 43) between July 1996 and April 1997. Demographics, procedures, operative techniques, and postoperative morbidity and mortality were calculated, and a subset of the first 50 patients was compared to a 50-patient cohort who underwent the same operation through a conventional median sternotomy. Demographics, postoperative morbidity and mortality, patient satisfaction, and charges were compared. RESULTS: Of the 84 patients, there were 2 operative mortalities both in class IV aortic patients from multisystem organ failure. There was no operative mortality in the patients undergoing mitral valve replacement or repair. The operations were carried out with the same accuracy and attention to detail as with the conventional operation. There was minimal postoperative bleeding, cerebral vascular accidents, or other major morbidity. Groin cannulation complications primarily were related to atherosclerotic femoral arteries. A comparison of the minimally invasive to the conventional group, although operative time and ischemia time was higher in minimally invasive group, the requirement for erythrocytes was significantly less, patient satisfaction was significantly greater, and charges were approximately 20% less than those in the conventional group. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive aortic and mitral valve surgery in patients without coronary disease can be done safely and accurately through small incisions. Patient satisfaction is up, return to normality is higher, and requirement for postrehabilitation services is less. In addition, the charges are approximately 20% less. These results serve as a paradigm for the future in terms of valve surgery in the managed care environment.     

A New Left Atrial Retractor for Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery

Abstract   Introduction: The recent boost of the minimally invasive techniques for mitral valve surgery has led to the development of a dedicated surgical outfit, including retractors, arterial and venous cannulas, and surgical instruments. An effective left atrial retractor is crucial, since an optimal exposure is a prerequisite for a successful mitral valve repair. Most of the available retractors require a supporting arm that is inserted in the chest via a parasternal hole. This maneuver may be associated with significant bleeding from the internal thoracic artery and vein or from their collaterals, especially in patients undergoing redo operations in whom the identification of these vessels may be difficult. The MitraXs is a self-expanding, pliable, left atrial retractor that may be inserted in the atrium from the minithoracotomy, and does not require any supporting arm. We describe its use in a patient with a previous history of esophageal resection and retrosternal colon interposition. Methods and Results: The mitral valve was approached via right minithoracotomy with femoral bypass and direct aortic cross-clamping. In this particular case, the MitraXs was used to avoid the blunt insertion of the conventional retractor's supporting arm in order to prevent any possible injury to the neo-esophagus.The mitral valve exposure was excellent, and the operation was easily performed. The postoperative course was uneventful. Comment: In our opinion, the described approach allows a safe exposure of the aorta and left atrium, and should be considered the approach of choice in patients with retrosternal anomalies. The use of the MitraXs retractor may represent a helpful addition in selected patients, and should be recommended for redo operations.     

Evolving techniques for mitral valve reconstruction

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effectiveness of new techniques of mitral valve reconstruction (MVR) that have evolved over the last decade, such as aggressive anterior leaflet repair and minimally invasive surgery using an endoaortic balloon occluder. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: MVR via conventional sternotomy has been an established treatment for mitral insufficiency for over 20 years, primarily for the treatment of patients with posterior leaflet prolapse. METHODS: Between June 1980 and June 2001, 1,195 consecutive patients had MVR with ring annuloplasty. Conventional sternotomy was used in 843 patients, minimally invasive surgery in 352 (since June 1996). Anterior leaflet repair was performed in 374 patients, with increasing use over the last 10 years. Follow-up was 100% complete (mean 4.6 years, range 0.5-20.5). RESULTS: Hospital mortality was 4.7% overall and 1.4% for isolated MVR (1.1% for minimally invasive surgery vs. 1.6% for conventional sternotomy; =.4). Multivariate analysis showed the factors predictive of increased operative risk to be age, NYHA functional class, concomitant procedures, and previous cardiac surgery. The 5-year results for freedom from cardiac death, reoperation, and valve-related complications among the 782 patients with degenerative etiology are, respectively, as follows ( >.05 for all end points): for anterior leaflet repair, 93%, 94%, 90%; for no anterior leaflet repair, 91%, 92%, 91%; for minimally invasive surgery, 97%, 89%, 93%; and for conventional sternotomy, 93%, 94%, 90%. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that late results of MVR after minimally invasive surgery and after anterior leaflet repair are equivalent to those achievable with conventional sternotomy and posterior leaflet repair. These options significantly expand the range of patients suitable for mitral valve repair surgery and give further evidence to support wider use of minimally invasive techniques.     

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.     

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.     

The role of the minimally invasive beating heart technique in reoperative valve surgery

Abstract Objective: We reviewed our experience to assess potential advantages of minimally invasive surgery without aortic clamping over conventional median sternotomy and cardioplegic arrest during reoperative valve surgery. Methods: From August 2008 to August 2010, 22 reoperative valve procedures were performed through a minimally invasive approach without aortic cross‐clamping [no‐clamp group (NCG)]. Postoperative results were compared to a matched population in terms of sex, age, and type of surgery, and operated through median sternotomy with aortic cross‐clamping and cardioplegic arrest [clamp group (CG)]. Results: We performed 17 mitral valve replacements (MVRs), one mitral valve repair, one MVR associated to a tricuspid plasty (TVP), and three isolated TVP in both groups. Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time was 166 and 163 minutes in NCG and CG, respectively. Intra‐aortic balloon pump was necessary in two (NCG) and three (CG) patients. Two patients died in both groups from multiorgan failure. Biochemical analysis showed no significant differences in perioperative lactate or creatine kinase‐MB values. Conclusions: Redo valve surgery with an unclamped aorta is feasible, effective, and at least as safe as surgery using cardioplegic arrest. There was, however, no difference in biochemical or clinical outcomes from conventional surgery using aortic clamping and cardioplegic techniques. (J Card Surg 2012;27:24–28)     

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.     

Mitral valve surgery and acute renal injury: port access versus median sternotomy

BACKGROUND: Many outcomes and complications of minimally invasive and conventional cardiac surgery await comparison. Patients undergoing mitral valve surgery commonly sustain renal injury. Using peak postoperative fractional change of serum creatinine as a marker of renal injury, we tested the hypothesis that mitral valve surgery with port access minithoracotomy (Port) and conventional surgery with a median sternotomy (MS) incision are associated with different degrees of acute renal injury. METHODS: We evaluated data from all isolated mitral valve operations by a single surgeon between 1990 and 2000 (MS = 90, Port = 227). We also performed a secondary analysis of mitral valve surgeries performed by both MS and Port approaches in a concurrent period from 1996 to 2002 (MS = 93, Port = 240). Univariable and multivariable tests were used to determine the association of surgical technique with peak postoperative creatinine (CrmaxPost) and peak postoperative fractional change in creatinine (%deltaCr); p less than 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: In our analysis that accounted for the date of surgery, we observed a highly significant independent association between surgical approach and %deltaCr, indicating a greater risk of acute renal injury in the MS group (F value 13.33; p = 0.0003). Similar findings were noted in the secondary (time-concurrent) analysis of %deltaCr (F value 12.65; p = 0.0176). CONCLUSIONS: We present retrospective evidence of reduced acute renal injury associated with the port access technique in mitral valve surgery patients. Our findings suggest that a port access minithoracotomy approach to mitral valve surgery may be preferable to conventional methods for patients with high renal risk.     

Right minithoracotomy and resternotomy approach in patients undergoing a redo mitral valve procedure

OBJECTIVESA minimally invasive approach via a thoracotomy is an alternative in challenging redo cardiac procedures. Our goal was to present our early postoperative experience with minimally invasive cardiac surgery via a right minithoracotomy (minimally invasive) and resternotomy in patients undergoing a mitral valve procedure as a reoperation.METHODSFrom 2017 until 2020, reoperation of the mitral valve was performed through a right-sided minithoracotomy in 27 patients and via a resternotomy in 26 patients. Patients with femoral vessels suitable for cannulation underwent a minimally invasive technique. Patients requiring concomitant procedures regarding the aortic valve were operated on via a resternotomy.RESULTSThe mean age was 66 ± 12 years in the minimally invasive group and 65 ± 12 years in the whole cohort. The average Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 11 ± 10% in the minimally invasive group and 13 ± 9% in all patients. The majority of the patients underwent reoperation because of severe mitral valve insufficiency (48% and 55%, respectively). The mean time to reoperation was 7 ± 9 years (minimally invasive group). The 30-day mortality was 4% in the minimally invasive group and 11% in the whole cohort. The blood loss was 566 ± 359 ml in the minimally invasive group and 793 ± 410 ml totally. There were no postoperative neurological complications in the minimally invasive group and 1 (2%) in the whole cohort. Postoperative echocardiography revealed competent mitral valve/prosthesis function in all patients.CONCLUSIONSA minimally invasive approach for a mitral valve reoperation in selected patients is a safe alternative to resternotomy with a low transfusion requirement. Both surgical techniques are associated with good postoperative outcomes.     

Mitral valve surgery after previous CABG with functioning IMA grafts

Background. Mitral valve surgery after previous coronary artery bypass grafting presents a challenging problem for the cardiac surgeon. An injury to patent coronary artery bypass grafts, especially internal mammary artery grafts, during reoperation via a redo sternotomy, may be fatal. Therefore, a reliable alternative to the redo sternotomy is desirable to minimize potential injury to internal mammary artery grafts.

Methods. Between February 1987 and October 1998, we performed 59 consecutive mitral valve operations after previous coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG). A total of 24 patients (41%) had functioning internal mammary artery (IMA) grafts and represent the population for this study. No patients were excluded for any reason. Of the 24 patients, 20 (83%) were men. Mean age was 66 ± 13 years (range 41 to 83 years) and the mean duration from CABG was 5.3 ± 3.6 years (range 0.1 to 12 years). Four (17%) had functioning bilateral internal mammary artery grafts. All had 3 to 4+ mitral regurgitation (MR) at the time of mitral valve surgery and the mean preoperative ejection fraction (EF) was 40% ± 14% (range 20% to 74 %).

Results. Twenty-one (88%) patients underwent mitral valve surgery through an anterolateral right thoracotomy and 3 (12%) through a redo sternotomy. Twenty-two (92%) patients, including the 3 patients in whom a redo sternotomy was used, had cannulation of the femoral artery and vein. Two patients required axillary artery cannulation. All 21 patients in whom the mitral valve was approached through a right thoracotomy underwent deep hypothermia (19.6° ± 2.1°C, range 14° to 25°C) without aortic clamping, with a mean duration of CPB of 138 ± 46 minutes (range 65 to 249 minutes). In 18 (75%), the MR was ischemic in origin and in 6 (25%) there was myxomatous degeneration. Nine (34%) required valve replacement and 15 (66%) underwent repair. There were no operative or hospital deaths and all patients were discharged to home or to a rehabilitation facility. There were 4 (17%) major complications. Two patients suffered respiratory failure requiring tracheotomy, 1 patient developed a perioperative MI requiring an intraaortic balloon pump and 1 developed heart block requiring a permanent pacemaker. There were no neurologic, peripheral vascular, bleeding, or wound complications.

Conclusions. Reoperative mitral valve surgery in the setting of functioning IMA grafts, even in the face of depressed LV function, can be done safely and with minimal morbidity.     

How to Avoid Problems in Redo Coronary Artery Bypass

ABSTRACT Background: Redo cardiac surgery still carries higher mortality and increased morbidity as compared with primary coronary revascularizations. Various steps can be taken to decrease the incidences of adverse outcomes. From our experience, we have accumulated safe steps to be taken during the surgical procedure to reach a positive outcome. Methods: We reviewed our own experience of redo coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) at two institutions during the last 4 years. Though the surgeons were the same at both institutions, because of institutional variability of patient referrals, operative equipment, anesthesia management, and preoperative care, we kept the data separate. Five surgeons performed CABG with almost similar myocardial preservation techniques; however, the surgical skill varied slightly depending on the seniority and clinical experience. We performed 433 redo coronary artery revascularizations at one institution and 201 in the second institution. Fifteen percent of these patients also had additional procedures, such as valve repair, valve replacement, or aneurysm resection. In this patient group, 160 patients underwent either urgent or emergent CABG. Urgent surgery was defined as patient revascularization during the same admission as cardiac catheterization, and emergency surgery was defined as a patient undergoing surgery on the same day as the catheterization, especially when hemodynamic instability was present. The total mortality was 7%, while the elective redo CABG mortality was 3%. The length of stay ranged from 8.5 to 12.6 days. The morbidity included perioperative stroke in 18 patients and nonfatal perioperative myocardial infarction (MI) in 19 patients. Major factors contributing to the mortality were stroke, perioperative bleeding and exploration, renal failure, respiratory failure, and malnutrition. Conclusion: We outlined the precautions and safe surgical approaches to be undertaken during redo CABG for a successful outcome.     

How to avoid problems in redo coronary artery bypass

BACKGROUND: Redo cardiac surgery still carries higher mortality and increased morbidity as compared with primary coronary revascularizations. Various steps can be taken to decrease the incidences of adverse outcomes. From our experience, we have accumulated safe steps to be taken during the surgical procedure to reach a positive outcome. METHODS: We reviewed our own experience of redo coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) at two institutions during the last 4 years. Though the surgeons were the same at both institutions, because of institutional variability of patient referrals, operative equipment, anesthesia management, and preoperative care, we kept the data separate. Five surgeons performed CABG with almost similar myocardial preservation techniques; however, the surgical skill varied slightly depending on the seniority and clinical experience. We performed 433 redo coronary artery revascularizations at one institution and 201 in the second institution. Fifteen percent of these patients also had additional procedures, such as valve repair, valve replacement, or aneurysm resection. In this patient group, 160 patients underwent either urgent or emergent CABG. Urgent surgery was defined as patient revascularization during the same admission as cardiac catheterization, and emergency surgery was defined as a patient undergoing surgery on the same day as the catheterization, especially when hemodynamic instability was present. The total mortality was 7%, while the elective redo CABG mortality was 3%. The length of stay ranged from 8.5 to 12.6 days. The morbidity included perioperative stroke in 18 patients and nonfatal perioperative myocardial infarction (MI) in 19 patients. Major factors contributing to the mortality were stroke, perioperative bleeding and exploration, renal failure, respiratory failure, and malnutrition. CONCLUSION: We outlined the precautions and safe surgical approaches to be undertaken during redo CABG for a successful outcome.     

Intensive imaging assessment for successful minimally invasive cardiac surgery

To clarify special imaging assessment that is useful for minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS), we examined 141 cases of MICS operations with ministernotomy or minithoracotomy. In the 141 patients, 62 valve, 42 coronary, 37 congenital heart, and 2 other procedures were successfully completed without conversion to full sternotomy. Preoperative chest x-ray, computed tomography, and/or magnetic resonance imaging were necessary for determining the level of ministernotomy, especially in aortic valve operations. Transthoracic echocardiography was useful for selecting procedures of mitral valve or intracardiac repair through the MICS approach. Intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography was essential for continuous monitoring of cardiac function, intracardiac flow, air bubbles, and so forth. The above results suggest that intensive imaging assessment might be very important for successful MICS operations with ministernotomy or minithoracotomy and that extensive indications for this technique exist for various cardiovascular diseases.