Comparison of outcomes between minimally invasive and median sternotomy for double and triple valve surgery: A meta-analysis

Background

Limited data exists demonstrating the efficacy of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) compared to median sternotomy (MS) for multiple valvular disease (MVD). This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare operative and peri-operative outcomes of MIS vs MS in MVD.

Methods

PubMed, Ovid, and Embase were searched from inception until August 2019 for randomized and observational studies comparing MIS and MS in patients with MVD. Clinical outcomes of intra- and postoperative times, reoperation for bleeding and surgical site infection were evaluated.

Results

Five observational studies comparing 340 MIS vs 414 MS patients were eligible for qualitative and quantitative review. The quality of evidence assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale was good for all included studies. Meta-analysis demonstrated increased cardiopulmonary bypass time for MIS patients (weighted mean difference [WMD], 0.487; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.365-0.608; P < .0001). Similarly, aortic cross-clamp time was longer in patients undergoing MIS (WMD, 0.632; 95% CI, 0.509-0.755; P < .0001). No differences were found in operative mortality, reoperation for bleeding, surgical site infection, or hospital stay.

Conclusions

MIS for MVD have similar short-term outcomes compared to MS. This adds value to the use of minimally invasive methods for multivalvular surgery, despite conferring longer operative times. However, the paucity in literature and learning curve associated with MIS warrants further evidence, ideally randomized control trials, to support these findings.

     

Cardiopulmonary exercise testing for personalized job reintegration after acute cardiovascular attacks: a pilot cross-sectional study

Background:Cardiovascular diseases (CVD), particularly the ischemic heart disease, are a growing public health issue. In addition, the return to work after an acute cardiovascular attack represents a complex challenge.Objectives:To evaluate utility and safety of cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET), particularly performed “on site”, to promote a return to work in line with the residual working capacity.Methods:Fifty-nine workers affected by a major cardiovascular event, aged 18-63 years, have been enrolled between 2015 and 2018. All the patients underwent a CPET in outpatient clinic. Eleven workers also underwent the “on site” CPET, recorded during their working activities.Results:Outpatient clinic CPET outcomes (i.e. normal, mild impairment or moderate/severe impairment of cardiopulmonary function) were associated with the subjective perception of workers’ health status after returning to work. The “on site” CPET was found to be safe and reliable to promote a personalized return to work of patients. In 7 out of 11 patients, the values of O₂ consumption (VO₂) during the working activity were higher than 40% of VO₂ max as obtained from laboratory CPET.Conclusions:This study provides evidence for safety and usefulness of “on site” CPET for a personalized statement of fitness for work. This may facilitate the job retention of patients characterized by a high risk of unnecessary job loss. The use of CPET represents a first step of energy expenditure evaluation associated with specific working tasks.Key words: Acute coronary syndrome, cardiopulmonary exercise testing, return to work