Port-Access mitral valve surgery: summary of results

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to review the short-term results of an initial experience with minimally invasive cardiac valve surgery using the Port-Access approach in terms of feasibility, safety, and reproducibility. METHODS: Between October 1995 and October 1997, 151 minimally invasive cardiac valve procedures were performed at our institution using the Port-Access approach. The patients' mean age was 58.1 years (range 21 to 91 years) and 50% were male. Aortic valve replacement was performed in 35 (23.2%) patients, mitral valve repair in 56 (37.1%) patients, mitral valve replacement in 36 (23.8%) patients, and complex valve procedures in 24 (15.9%) patients. RESULTS: The operative mortality rate for isolated mitral valve surgery was 1.1% (1/92) and for all mitral valve surgery 3.5% (4/113). The operative mortality rate for isolated aortic valve patients was 5.7% (2/35). For the total group the operating mortality was 4% (6/151). Early complications for mitral valve patients included reoperation for bleeding or tamponade in 5 (4.4%) patients, myocardial infarction in 2 (1.2%) patients, and transient ischemic attack and wound infection in 1 (0.1%) patient each. One patient required reoperation for mitral valve failure that resulted in aortic dissection unrelated to the Endoaortic Clamp catheter and ultimately led to death. Two (5.6%) aortic valve patients required reoperation for bleeding and two (5.6%) required reoperation for tamponade. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive Port-Access techniques can be applied to most patients with valvular heart disease with minimal morbidity and mortality and good postoperative valve function and may be the preferred approach for isolated mitral and aortic 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.     

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.     

微创小切口心脏瓣膜手术134例

目的总结经微创小切口行心脏瓣膜手术的临床经验,探讨手术径路、方法、效果以及可能的危险因素。方法采用微创小切口行心脏瓣膜手术134例,其中经胸骨旁切口行主动脉瓣置换术5例,二尖瓣置换术2例;经右胸前外侧切口行二尖瓣手术46例,单纯三尖瓣手术15例;经胸骨上段小切口(反Z字形)行主动脉瓣置换术11例;经胸骨下段劈开加横断右半胸骨(倒L形)切口行二尖瓣手术55例。结果术后早期死亡3例,其中2例死于低心排血量综合征和右心功能不全,1例死于急性肝、肾功能衰竭。随访114例,随访时间2个月~7年,术后6个月患者的心功能均有不同程度的改善,切口疤痕隐蔽,复查心脏彩色超声心动图显示心瓣膜功能良好。结论微创小切口行心脏瓣膜手术可行,避免了完全劈开胸骨,维持胸廓的完整性,减少损伤,相对美观,有利于患者术后的恢复。     

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.     

Minimally Invasive Approach for Redo Mitral Valve Surgery: A True Benefit for the Patient

ABSTRACT 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.     

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.     

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.     

Minimally-invasive versus conventional aortic valve replacement – perioperative course and mid-term results

Objective: We performed a case-control-study to compare perioperative and mid-term results of minimally invasive with conventional aortic valve replacement. Methods: Between 8/96 and 7/97, 113 patients underwent isolated aortic valve replacement (minimally invasive: 29, conventional: 84) in our Department. Diagnosis, ejection fraction, pressure gradient/regurgitation fraction, age, gender and body-mass-index were used as matching criteria for the case-control-study. For qualitative data correspondence was requested, for quantitative data deviations up to 10% were accepted. With these criteria 25 patients of the minimally invasive group were matched to 25 patients of conventional group. All patients were reexplored 1 year after aortic valve replacement. Statistical analysis was done by the Fisher's exact test for qualitative data and the Mann–Whitney test for quantitative data. Results: We implanted 15 (20) bioprosthesis’ and 10 (five) mechanical prosthesis’ in the minimally invasive, respectively, conventional group. There were no statistically significant differences between both groups with respect to the perioperative course, only duration of surgery (mean 201.6 vs. 143.9 min, P<0.01) and extracorporeal circulation (mean 116.1 vs. 71.3 min, P<0.01) as well as aortic-cross-clamp-time (mean 77.9 vs. 46.9 min, P<0.01) were significantly longer in the minimally invasive group. Postoperative complications occurred in one patient of the minimally invasive group (dissection of the right coronary artery) and four patients of the conventional group (third degree AV block, pneumothorax, grand mal convulsion, cardiopulmonary resuscitation). Two patients, one of each group, died during follow-up for unknown reasons. Follow-up revealed no significant differences with respect to clinical and echocardiographic data, but the shorter skin incision was cosmetically more accepted by patients of the minimally invasive group. Minor paravalvular leaks occurred in four patients of the minimally invasive and three patients of the conventional group as diagnosed by transthoracic echocardiography. Conclusions: Both surgical techniques may be performed with comparable perioperative and mid-term results, but the better cosmetic result in the minimally invasive group is paid by a longer duration of surgery.     

Minimally Invasive Valve Operations

Background. To reduce the morbidity from valvular heart operations, a right parasternal approach was introduced. We report our initial experience with the procedure.

Methods. From January 1996 through July 1996, 115 patients underwent primary isolated valve procedures. One hundred (85%) patients underwent the operation through a right parasternal incision.

Results. There was one hospital death secondary to a stroke on the fifth postoperative day. Three patients (two with aortic valve operations and one having a mitral valve procedure) required conversion to sternotomy. Mean aortic occlusion time was 71 minutes; mean cardiopulmonary bypass time was 93 minutes. Mean stay in the intensive care unit was 27 hours and mean hospital postoperative stay was 5.7 days. Seventy-seven percent of the patients did not receive blood transfusions. Comparison with median sternotomy demonstrated a reduction in both postoperative length of stay and direct hospital costs.

Conclusions. We conclude that this minimally invasive approach is safe for a variety of valve procedures and is effective in reducing surgical trauma and cost.     

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.     

Minimally invasive mitral valve repair suggests earlier operations for mitral valve disease

OBJECTIVE: We began minimally invasive mitral valve surgery in August, 1996, to reduce hospital costs, to improve patient recovery, cosmetic appearance, and to decrease trauma, yet maintain the same quality of surgery. To validate this approach we reviewed our entire experience through May 2002. METHODS: From August 1996 to May 2002, we performed 413 minimally invasive mitral valve operations including 51 mitral valve replacements and 362 mitral valve repairs. Excluding 4 robotically assisted repairs, we evaluated 358 patients, using the mitral valve repairs as the basis for this retrospective survey. These operations were performed through a 6- to 8-cm minimally invasive incision, beginning with parasternal and, most recently, lower ministernotomy (181 patients). The mitral valve reparative techniques include repair of 94 prolapsed anterior leaflets, posterior leaflet resection, leaflet advancement, commissuroplasty, Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE; Gore-Tex, W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc, Flagstaff, Ariz) chordal placement, and ring annuloplasty. Cannulation sites varied but primarily utilized a miniaturized system of 24F catheters in both the inferior and superior venae cavae with assisted venous suction. The Cosgrove ring was used in 95% of the patients undergoing this procedure. RESULTS: The operative mortality was 0/358. Perioperative morbidity included a 26% incidence of new atrial fibrillation, 2% incidence of pacemaker implantation, 0.5% incidence of deep sternal wound infection, and 1.9% incidence of stroke after an operation. There were 10 arterial and 3 venous complications. The mean length of stay was 6 days and 208 patients stayed < or =5 days. Only 25% of the patients underwent homologous blood transfusion. The mean follow-up was 36 months with 1.4% lost to follow-up. There were 12 late deaths and a survival at 5 years of 95%. There were 21 valves requiring reoperation for structural valve failure of 5.8%. The probability of freedom from reoperation at 5 years was 92%. CONCLUSION: This study documents the safety of minimally invasive mitral valve repair surgery in 358 patients. It also documents a low incidence of homologous blood use, requirement for post-hospital rehabilitation, and general morbidity.     

Minimally invasive tricuspid operation using port access

BACKGROUND: Port-access techniques performed through a right mini-thoracotomy have been extensively described for both the mitral and aortic valves. However, reports of tricuspid valve operations using the port-access approach are rare. A technique for minimally invasive tricuspid valve operation using port access is described. METHODS: Port-access approach was applied to 33 consecutive patients undergoing tricuspid valve repair or replacement. RESULTS: Twelve percent (4 of 33) underwent tricuspid replacement and 88% underwent repair (28 of 33). Perioperative mortality was 6% (2 of 33) and conversion to median sternotomy was 3% (1 of 33). CONCLUSIONS: Port-access tricuspid operations are both feasible and safe with a low conversion rate to conventional median sternotomy.     

Surgery for infective endocarditis: determinate factors in the outcome

AIM: The appropriate operative procedures for treatment of infective endocarditis (IE) are still controversial. The authors reviewed their own operative results focusing on preoperative risk factors, intraoperative findings and operative procedures. METHODS: The authors reviewed the cases of 40 adult patients who had undergone surgery since 1999. The mean age of patients was 58 years ranging from 31 to 78 including 30 males and 10 females. Thirty-three patients had native valve endocarditis (NVE) and the remaining seven patients had prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE). Diseased lesions were located in the mitral valve (MV) in 21 patients, aortic valve in 15 and mitral plus aortic valves in four. Twenty-eight patients (70%) were operated on during the active phase of IE. Streptococcus, Staphyrococcus and Enterococcus species were predominant in the bacterial examination. RESULTS: Active vegetation was observed in 26 (65%) patients. Perforation of valve leaflets was observed in 11 (28%) cases. Changes of native MV leaflet were mild in 8 (40%) out of 20, which seemed to be reparable, while, changes of the native aortic valve leaflet were moderate to severe in 13 (87%) out of 15 patients. Valvular annuls were involved in the infection in 17 (43%) patients. Of the 33 NVE patients, prosthetic valve replacement was performed in 29 patients incduding 19 mitral and 15 aortic valves. MV plasty was performed in 4 patients. In seven PVE patients, prosthetic MV replacement was performed twice. In the aortic group, three patients underwent aortic root translocation, The Ross procedure and standard root replacement were performed respectively. Four patients died after surgery including one NVE case and three PVE cases. Three PVE patients who underwent aortic root translocation or the Ross procedure survived. The hospital mortality of NVE and PVE surgery was 3% and 43% (P<0.01), respectively. By univariant anlysis, there were no significant correlations between operative results and preoperative factors such as bacteria, infective phase, cardiac failure, renal failure, sepsis or brain morbidity. The only significant factor on hospital mortality was PVE. Three patients died of non-cardiac diseases during the follow-up period. CONCLUSION: Operative results of NVE were good after complete resection of infective sites including valve annulus. Both valve replacement and plasty were available for NVE patients. In PVE, new strategies are indispensable and aortic root translocation or the Ross procedure should be a treatment of choice.     

Rarity of invasiveness in right-sided infective endocarditis

Objective

The rarity of invasiveness of right-sided infective endocarditis (IE) compared with left-sided has not been well recognized and evaluated. Thus, we compared invasiveness of right- versus left-sided IE in surgically treated patients.

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 mitral valve surgery: a 6-year experience with 714 patients

BACKGROUND: This study analyzes a single institutional experience with minimally invasive mitral valve operations of 6 years, reviewing short-term morbidity and mortality and long-term echocardiographic follow-up data. METHODS: Seven hundred fourteen consecutive patients had minimally invasive mitral valve procedures between November 1995 and November 2001; concomitant procedures included 91 multiple valves and 18 coronary artery bypass grafts. Of these 714 patients, 561 patients had isolated mitral valve operations (375 repairs, 186 replacements). Mean age was 58.3 years (range, 14 to 96 years; 30.1% > 70 years), and 15.4% of patients had previous cardiac operations. Arterial cannulation was femoral in 79.0% and central in 21%, with the port access balloon endo-occlusion used in 82.3%. Cardioplegia was transjugular retrograde (54.1%) or antegrade (29.4%). Right anterior minithoracotomy was used in 96.6% and left posterior minithoracotomy in 2.2%. RESULTS: Hospital mortality for primary isolated mitral valve repair was 1.1% and 5.8% for isolated mitral valve replacement. Overall hospital mortality was 4.2% (30 of 714). Mean cross-clamp time was 92 minutes and mean cardiopulmonary bypass time was 127 minutes. Postoperatively, median ventilation time was 11 hours, intensive care unit time was 19 hours, and total hospital stay was 6 days. Complications for all patients included permanent neurologic deficit (2.9%), aortic dissection (0.3%); there was no mediastinal infection (0.0%). Follow-up echocardiography demonstrated 89.1% of the repair patients had only trace or no residual mitral insufficiency. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the minimally invasive port access approach to mitral valve operations is reproducible with low perioperative morbidity and mortality and with late outcomes that are equivalent to conventional operations.     

Characteristics and longer-term outcomes of paravalvular leak after aortic and mitral valve surgery

Background

Paravalvular leak (PVL) is often seen after aortic (AV) and mitral valve (MV) surgery, either due to infection or valve dehiscence. We sought to describe predictors of longer-term outcomes in patients who developed PVL after AV and MV surgery and were considered eligible for reoperative cardiac surgery (RCS).

Minimally invasive surgery with a partial sternotomy "J" approach

The minimally invasive partial sternotomy "J" incision can be used for most isolated mitral valves, tricuspid valves, aortic valves, atrial septal defects, maze procedures, aortic repairs, and aortic valve reoperations. This article reviews the technical approaches and outcomes for various procedures. For 2,004 mitral valve repairs, our 30-day in-hospital mortality was 0.2% and for 1,103 aortic valve procedures, it was 0.8%. In addition to both a better cosmetic result and earlier return to work, the benefits include less blood loss, less pain, better respiratory function, and better 1-year survival for mitral valve procedures. Similar results have been obtained for aortic valve procedures. Thus, all patients undergoing isolated aortic or mitral valve repairs are offered a minimally invasive operation.     

Minimally invasive cardiac surgery--the efficacy of right parasterna approach

The recent concepts of minimally invasive surgery have affected even cardiovascular surgery. Especially, the desire to lessen incisional pain and hospital stay has made minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) desirable. However, its efficacy is still controversial. To investigate this goal, we assessed the efficacy of avoidance of median sternotomy through right parasternal approach in view of the postoperative bleeding, % transfusion, postoperative intubation period, degree of incisional pain and serum level of cytokines. Patients with mitral valve disease or atrial septal defects were divided into the MICS (M) group and the control (C) group. In the M group, operations were performed through right parasternal incision under cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) instituted by placing a venous cannula directly into superior vena cava and arterial and the other venous cannulae into femoral artery and vein. On the other hand, in the C group, operations were performed through median sternotomy under conventional CPB. There were no significant differences in CPB and AXC time between two groups. The M group showed significantly lower value in the postoperative bleeding volume, % transfusion, postoperative intubation time. Patients in the M group showed higher satisfaction of small incision as compared with those in the C group. Serum level of IL-8 after CPB was significantly lower in the M group than in the C group. These results suggested that MICS for mitral disease or ASD appears to be less invasive when median sternotomy is avoided. This suggest that MICS is a promising and contributed approach for open heart surgery to improve the QOL of the patients.