Key result
Partial upper sternotomy is linked to ~32% less mediastinal drainage than full sternotomy in obese patients.
Why the study?
Controversial opinions exist regarding aortic valve replacement through partial upper sternotomy in obese patients, and potential clinical advantages over conventional full sternotomy remain unclear.
Does partial upper sternotomy aortic valve replacement improve perioperative outcomes compared to conventional full sternotomy in obese patients?
Observational (n=184)
No
Does partial upper sternotomy aortic valve replacement improve perioperative outcomes compared to conventional full sternotomy in obese patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 150% vs 220%
p-value: p=0.018
In obese patients undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement, a partial upper sternotomy approach is safe and reduces blood loss, transfusions, and ICU stay compared to full sternotomy.
May reduce drainage and ICU stay after AVR in obese patients; hypothesis-generating, needs RCTs before practice change.
OBJECTIVE: Controversial opinions exist for aortic valve replacement (AVR) through partial upper sternotomy in obese patients. Moreover, this study sought to investigate the potential clinical advantage of partial upper sternotomy aortic valve replacement (mini-AVR) over conventional full sternotomy aortic valve replacement (con-AVR) in obese patients. METHODS: ] patients undergoing isolated primary AVR were included: 98 patients underwent conventional full sternotomy, and 86 patients underwent partial upper sternotomy. Propensity score (PS) matching was applied to eliminate the bassline imbalances in the mini-AVR and the con-AVR groups. RESULTS: After one-to-one propensity score matching, two groups of 60 patients were obtained. No in-hospital death occurred in the two groups. In addition, cardiopulmonary bypass time and total operative time were similar across the 2 groups, but the aortic cross-clamp time was significantly shorter in the con-AVR group (P = .0.022). The amount of mediastinal drainage at 48 h after surgery (P = 0.018) and postoperative blood transfusions (P = 0.014) were significantly lower in the mini-AVR group. There was no difference in ventilation time (P = .0.145), but a shorter intensive care unit stay time (P = 0.021) in the mini-AVR group. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that aortic valve replacement through a mini-AVR in obese patients is a safe and effective procedure. It outperformed con-AVR in terms of blood loss, blood product transfusion, and ICU stay.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xie et al. (2022) conducted an observational in Aortic valve disease in obese patients (n=184). Partial upper sternotomy aortic valve replacement (mini-AVR) vs. Conventional full sternotomy aortic valve replacement (con-AVR) was evaluated on Mediastinal drainage at 48 h after surgery (mL) (p=0.018). Partial upper sternotomy aortic valve replacement in obese patients significantly reduced median mediastinal drainage at 48 hours (150.0 mL vs 220.0 mL) and ICU stay compared to conventional full sternotomy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: