Sex-specific differences and postoperative outcomes of minimally invasive and sternotomy valve surgery.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objectives
Female sex is an established risk factor for postoperative complications after heart surgery, but the influence of sex on outcomes after minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) for valvular replacement/repair remains controversial. We examined whether the role of sex as a risk factor varies by surgical approach [MICS vs conventional sternotomy (ST)] and further assessed outcomes among female patients including in-hospital mortality and postoperative complications by surgical approach.Methods
We analysed data from a multicentre registry for patients who underwent isolated aortic valve and mitral surgery with MICS or ST. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Propensity score matching was used to minimize between-group differences.Results
Among the 15 155 patients included in the study, 7674 underwent MICS (50.6%). Female sex was equally distributed in the MICS and ST groups (47.3% vs 47.6%, respectively). Risk for surgery was higher in the ST group than in the MICS group {EuroSCORE II: 4.0 [standard deviation (SD): 6.8] vs 3.7 [SD: 6.4]; P = 0.005}, including among female patients only [ST vs MICS 4.6 (SD: 6.9) vs 4.2 (SD: 6.3); P = 0.04]. Mortality did not significantly vary by procedure among women [MICS vs ST, 2.4% vs 2.8%; hazard ratio 1.09, 95% confidence interval 0.71-1.73; P (surgical approach × sex) = 0.51]. The results also did not vary after adjusting for confounders.Conclusions
Female sex was associated with higher mortality in patients undergoing valve surgery, regardless of surgical approach. In female patients, MICS did not provide any benefits over ST in terms of in-hospital deaths or postoperative complications.Subject collection
117, 125.
SUBMITTER: Moscarelli M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8858592 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background:Cardiac redo surgery, especially after a full sternotomy, is considered a high-risk procedure. Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) is a potential therapeutic approach. However, current developments in interventional cardiology necessitate additional discussion regarding the therapy of choice in high-risk patients. In this context, it is necessary to clarify the perioperative and postoperative risks induced by the factor previous sternotomy in the setting of MIMVS. Thus, we present a comparative study analyzing the outcome of MIMVS after previous sternotomy vs. primary operation. Methods:We identified 19 patients who received isolated or combined mitral valve (MV) surgery via the MIMVS approach after previous full sternotomy (PS group) and compared the results to those of a group of 357 patients who received primary MIMVS (non-PS group). After a propensity score analysis, groups of n?=?15 and n?=?131, respectively, were subjected to a comparative evaluation. A 1-year follow-up analysis of functional cardiac parameters and clinical symptoms was performed, accompanied by a Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results:Except for the rate of realized MV reconstructions (PS group: 53.8% vs. non-PS group: 85.5%; p?=?0.011), no significant differences were to be noted within the intraoperative and early postoperative course. However, patients in the PS group experienced an increased intensive care unit stay length (PS group: 2?days, 95% CI, 1-8 vs. non-PS group: 1 day, 95% CI, 1-2; p?=?0.072). The follow-up examinations revealed excellent functional and clinical outcomes for both groups. The Kaplan-Meier analysis displayed no significant difference regarding the postoperative mortality (p?=?0.929) related to the patients at risk. Conclusion:A previous sternotomy remains a risk factor for MIMVS and demands special attention in the early postoperative period. Nevertheless, the early- and late-term results concerning the functional and clinical outcomes suggest that the MIMVS procedure is satisfactory, even after a full sternotomy.
| S-EPMC5811546 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Since their introduction, it has been demonstrated that minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MIAVR) approaches are safe and effective for the treatment of aortic valve diseases. To date, the main advantage of these approaches is represented by the reduced surgical trauma, with a subsequent reduced complication rate and faster recovery. This makes such approaches an appealing choice also for frail patients [obese, aged, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)]. The standardization of the minimally invasive techniques, together with the implementation of preoperative workup and anesthesiological intra- and post-operative care, led to an amelioration of surgical results and reduction of surgical times. Moreover, the improvement of surgical technology and the introduction of new devices such as sutureless and rapid deployment (SURD) valves, has helped the achievement of comparable results to traditional surgery. However, transcatheter technologies are nowadays more and more important in the treatment of aortic valve disease, also in low risk patients. For this reason surgeons should put new efforts for further reducing the surgical trauma in the future, even taking inspiration from other disciplines. In this review, we aim to present a review of literature evidences regarding minimally invasive treatment of aortic diseases, also reflecting our personal experience with MIAVR techniques. This review could represent a tool for a well-structured patient assessment and preoperative planning, in order to safely carrying out an MIAVR procedure with satisfactory outcomes.
| S-EPMC8024826 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Tricuspid valve disease carries a very unfavorable prognosis when medically treated. Despite that, surgical intervention is still underperformed for tricuspid valve disease due to the reported high morbidity and mortality from a sternotomy approach. This had led to a shift towards maximizing medical therapy for right ventricular failure and, as a result, a more significant delay in surgical referrals with surgical risks when patients are finally referred. Tricuspid valve patients usually have other co-morbidities resulting from their systemic venous congestion and low flow cardiac output. Minimally invasive tricuspid valve surgery provides less tissue injury and, as a result, less trauma during surgery. This provides a hope for both patients and treating doctors to be more open for providing this procedure with less complications. Isolated minimally invasive tricuspid valve surgery is still not performed as widely as expected. This can be partly due to the adverse outcomes historically labelled to tricuspid valve surgery or by the long journey of learning the surgical team would need to commit to with a minimal access approach. In this article we will review the perioperative pathway, and outcomes of isolated minimally invasive tricuspid valve surgery in the available English literature.
| S-EPMC8024798 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:With the emergence of a new concept aimed at individualization of patient care, the focus will shift from whether a minimally invasive procedure is better than conventional treatment, to the question of which patients will benefit most from which technique? The superiority of minimally invasive valve surgery (MIVS) has not yet been proved. We believe that through better patient selection advantages of this technique can become more pronounced. In our current study, we evaluate the feasibility of 3D computed tomography (CT) imaging reconstruction in the preoperative planning of patients referred for MIVS. METHODS:We retrospectively analysed all consecutive patients who were referred for minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) and minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MIAVR) to a single surgeon in a tertiary referral centre for MIVS between March 2014 and 2015. Prospective preoperative planning was done for all patients and was based on evaluations by a multidisciplinary heart-team, an echocardiography, conventional CT images and 3D CT reconstruction models. RESULTS:A total of 39 patients were included in our study; 16 for mitral valve surgery (MVS) and 23 patients for aortic valve replacement (AVR). Eleven patients (69%) within the MVS group underwent MIMVS. Five patients (31%) underwent conventional MVS. Findings leading to exclusion for MIMVS were a tortuous or slender femoro-iliac tract, calcification of the aortic bifurcation, aortic elongation and pericardial calcifications. Furthermore, 2 patients had a change of operative strategy based on preoperative planning. Seventeen (74%) patients in the AVR group underwent MIAVR. Six patients (26%) underwent conventional AVR. Indications for conventional AVR instead of MIAVR were an elongated ascending aorta, ascending aortic calcification and ascending aortic dilatation. One patient (6%) in the MIAVR group was converted to a sternotomy due to excessive intraoperative bleeding. Two mortalities were reported during conventional MVS. There were no mortalities reported in the MIMVS, MIAVR or conventional AVR group. CONCLUSIONS:Preoperative planning of minimally invasive left-sided valve surgery with 3D CT reconstruction models is a useful and feasible method to determine operative strategy and exclude patients ineligible for a minimally invasive approach, thus potentially preventing complications.
| S-EPMC6716458 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectivesMinimally invasive mitral valve surgery (mini-MVR) has numerous associated benefits. However, many studies fail to include greater-risk patients. We hypothesized that a minimally invasive approach in a representative cohort provides excellent outcomes with reduced resource utilization.MethodsMitral valve surgical records from 2011 to 2016 were paired with institutional financial records. Patients were stratified by approach and propensity-score matched to balance preoperative difference. The primary outcomes of interest were resource utilization including cost, discharge to a facility, and readmission.ResultsA total of 478 patients underwent mitral surgery (21% mini-MVR) and were balanced after matching (n = 74 per group), with 18% of patients having nondegenerative mitral disease. Outcomes were excellent with similar rates of major morbidity (9.5% mini-MVR vs 10.8% conventional, P = .78). Mini-MVR cases had lower rates of transfusion (11% vs 27%, P = .01) and shorter ventilator times (3.7 vs 6.0 hours, P < .0001). Mean total hospital cost was equivalent ($49,703 vs $54,970, P = .235) with mini-MVR having lower ancillary ($1645 vs $2652, P = .001) and blood costs ($383 vs $1058, P = .001). These savings were offset by longer surgical times (291 vs 234 minutes, P < .0001) with greater surgical ($7645 vs $7293, P = .0001) and implant costs ($1148 vs $748, P = .03). Rates of discharge to a facility (9.6% vs 16.2%) and readmission (9.6% vs 4.1%) were not statistically different.ConclusionsIn a real-world cohort, mini-MVR continues to demonstrate excellent results with a favorable resource utilization profile. Greater surgical and implant costs with mini-MVR are offset by decreased transfusions and ancillary needs leading to equivalent overall hospital cost.
| S-EPMC6100741 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Graphical abstract Highlights • LA dissection is a rare complication of cardiac surgery seen more often in MV repair.• It can present heterogeneously, from being benign to causing hemodynamic collapse.• Perioperative TEE is valuable in identifying LA dissection and aiding in management.• TEE can show the cause of instability, such as MV inflow or PV outflow obstruction.
| S-EPMC10442375 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective Despite the recent increase in the use of minimally invasive approaches to mitral valve surgery in patients with a prior sternotomy, the outcomes of the robotic approach to mitral valve surgery in this patient population have not been examined. Methods We retrospectively reviewed 342 consecutive patients who underwent mitral valve surgery after a prior sternotomy between 2013 and 2020, in which the robotic approach was used in 21 patients (6.1%). We reviewed the clinical details of these 21 patients. Results The median age was 71 years [interquartile range 64.00, 74.00 years], and mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality was 4.2% ± 3.8%. The indication for mitral valve surgery was degenerative mitral valve disease in 33.3% (7/21), functional disease in 28.6% (6/21), mixed disease in 4.8% (1/21), rheumatic disease in 9.5% (2/21), and failed repair for degenerative disease in 23.8% (5/21). No cases required conversion from robotic assistance to alternative approaches, there were no intraoperative deaths, and intraoperative transesophageal echocardiogram confirmed complete elimination of mitral regurgitation in 90.5% (19/21) of cases. Thirty-day mortality was 0.0% (0/21), and 1-year mortality was 4.8% (1/21). There were no strokes or wound infections at 30 days, and 14.3% (3/21) of patients received intraoperative blood product transfusions. Conclusions The results of this retrospective review suggest that the robotic approach to mitral valve surgery in patients with a prior sternotomy is safe in experienced hands. Although some centers have considered prior sternotomy a relative contraindication to robotic mitral valve surgery, this approach is feasible and can be considered an option for experienced surgeons.
| S-EPMC9196136 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe safety of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) in elderly patients is still debated. Our objective was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing MIMVS with conventional sternotomy (CS) in elderly patients (≥65 years old).MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for trials and observational studies comparing MIMVS with CS in patients ≥65 years old presenting for mitral valve surgery. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis of all outcomes.ResultsThe MIMVS group had lower odds of acute renal failure (odds ratio [OR] 0.27; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.78), prolonged intubation (>48 h; OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.70), less blood product transfusion (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.82 units; 95% CI -1.29 to -0.34 units), shorter ICU length of stay (LOS; WMD -2.57 days; 95% CI -3.24 to -1.90 days) and hospital LOS (WMD -4.06 days; 95% CI -5.19 to -2.94 days). There were no significant differences in the odds of mortality, stroke, respiratory infection, reoperation for bleeding, and postoperative atrial fibrillation. MIMVS was associated with longer cross-clamp (WMD 11.8 min; 95% CI 3.5 to 20.1 min) and cardiopulmonary bypass times (WMD 23.0 min; 95% CI 10.4 to 35.6 min).ConclusionsMIMVS in elderly patients is associated with lower postoperative complications, blood transfusion, shorter ICU, and hospital LOS, and longer cross-clamp and bypass times.
| S-EPMC8414825 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionNumbers of patients undergoing mitral valve repair (MVr) surgery for severe mitral regurgitation have grown and will continue to rise. MVr is routinely performed via median sternotomy; however, there is a move towards less invasive surgical approaches.There is debate within the clinical and National Health Service (NHS) commissioning community about widespread adoption of minimally invasive MVr surgery in the absence of robust research evidence; implementation requires investment in staff and infrastructure.The UK Mini Mitral trial will provide definitive evidence comparing patient, NHS and clinical outcomes in adult patients undergoing MVr surgery. It will establish the best surgical approach for MVr, setting a standard against which emerging percutaneous techniques can be measured. Findings will inform optimisation of cost-effective practice.Methods and analysisUK Mini Mitral is a multicentre, expertise based randomised controlled trial of minimally invasive thoracoscopically guided right minithoracotomy versus conventional sternotomy for MVr. The trial is taking place in NHS cardiothoracic centres in the UK with established minimally invasive mitral valve surgery programmes. In each centre, consenting and eligible patients are randomised to receive surgery performed by consultant surgeons who meet protocol-defined surgical expertise criteria. Patients are followed for 1 year, and consent to longer term follow-up.Primary outcome is physical functioning 12 weeks following surgery, measured by change in Short Form Health Survey (SF-36v2) physical functioning scale. Early and 1 year echo data will be reported by a core laboratory. Estimates of key clinical and health economic outcomes will be reported up to 5 years.The primary economic outcome is cost effectiveness, measured as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained over 52 weeks following index surgery.Ethics and disseminationA favourable opinion was given by Wales REC 6 (16/WA/0156). Trial findings will be disseminated to patients, clinicians, commissioning groups and through peer reviewed publication.Trial registration numberISRCTN13930454.
| S-EPMC8054102 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Protocols for "Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS)" are on the rise in different surgical disciplines and represent one of the most important recent advancements in perioperative medical care. In cardiac surgery, only few ERAS protocols have been described in the past. At University Heart Center Hamburg, Germany, we invented an ERAS protocol for patients undergoing minimally invasive cardiac valve surgery. In this retrospective single center study, we aimed to describe the implementation of our ERAS program and to evaluate the results of the first 50 consecutive patients. Our ERAS protocol was developed according to a modified Kern cycle by an expert group, literature search, protocol creation and pilot implementation in the clinical practice. Data of the first 50 consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive cardiac valve surgery were analysed retrospectively. The key features of our multidisciplinary ERAS protocol are physiotherapeutic prehabilitation, minimally invasive valve surgery techniques, modified cardiopulmonary bypass management, fast-track anaesthesia with on- table extubation and early mobilisation. A total of 50 consecutive patients (mean age of 51.9±11.9 years, mean STS score of 0.6±0.3) underwent minimally-invasive mitral or aortic valve surgery. The adherence to the ERAS protocol was high and neither protocol related complications nor in-hospital mortality occurred. 12% of the patients developed postoperative atrial fibrillation, postoperative delirium emerged in two patients and reintubation was required in one patient. Intensive care unit stay was 14.0±7.4 hours and total hospital stay 6.2±2.9 days. Our ERAS protocol is feasible and safe in minimally-invasive cardiac surgery setting and has a clear potential to improve patients outcome.
| S-EPMC7145109 | biostudies-literature