Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery After Previous Sternotomy: Experience in 181 Patients
Objective This study evaluated the results for minimally invasive mitral valve (MV) surgery in patients who had undergone previous cardiac operations through a sternotomy. Methods From March 1, 1999 to January 2008, minimally invasive MV reoperations were performed in 181 consecutive patients (110 m...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Annals of thoracic surgery 2009-03, Vol.87 (3), p.709-714 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Objective This study evaluated the results for minimally invasive mitral valve (MV) surgery in patients who had undergone previous cardiac operations through a sternotomy. Methods From March 1, 1999 to January 2008, minimally invasive MV reoperations were performed in 181 consecutive patients (110 men) with a mean age of 64.5 ± 12 years. A right-sided lateral minithoracotomy with femoral cannulation for cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) was used. The principal indication was symptomatic severe mitral regurgitation (mean grade, 3.0 ± 0.8). Previous procedures were isolated coronary bypass grafting (CABG) in 76 (42%), isolated valve operation, 55 (30%); combined CABG and valve, 16 (9%); and other cardiac operations, 34 (19%). MV replacement was previously performed in 19 patients and MV repair in 31. Mean preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction was 0.54 ± 0.16. Results MV repair, including repeat repair, was performed in 109 patients (60%) and MV replacement in 72 (40%). Operations were performed during ventricular fibrillation in 140 (77%), and a transthoracic aortic cross-clamp was used in 31 (17%). Ten patients (6%) underwent beating heart operations with CPB support. Mean total operating time was 176 ± 50 min. Mean CPB time was 135 ± 40 min. Thirty-day mortality was 6.6%. Early echocardiographic follow-up revealed excellent valve function in most patients. Conclusion A minimally invasive approach is a useful alternative for patients requiring a MV procedure after a previous cardiac operation, particularly in patients with patent coronary bypass grafts or previous aortic valve replacement. Very good perioperative results can be achieved with this method. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0003-4975 1552-6259 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2008.11.053 |