Robotic mitral valve repair is a safe and effective procedure with excellent short-term outcomes and durable long-term results at 5 years.
High repair success and event-free survival support robotic MV repair feasibility; leaves open need for randomized comparisons.
BACKGROUND: Since the inception of robotic mitral valve repair (MV) in 2007 at our institution, it has become an acceptable surgical option with proven efficacy and safety. The objective of this study is to analyze the early and long-term clinical outcomes of patients undergoing robotic MV repair. METHODS: A total of 310 patients (aged 48.4±13.7 years, 201 males) undergoing robotic MV repair using the da Vinci system (Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA) between August 2007 and December 2015 in our institution were evaluated. The preoperative demographics, operative profiles and postoperative outcomes including follow-up echocardiographic results were analyzed. RESULTS: Successful MV repair was achieved in 98.4% (n=305) of patients, with no significant residual mitral regurgitation (MR) postoperatively. There were no early postoperative deaths. Early postoperative complications included: stroke (n=3, 1.0%), new onset dialysis (n=1, 0.3%) and reoperation (n=3, 1.0%). During a median follow-up of 55.7 months (inter-quartile range 30.3 to 81.3 months), six (1.9%) patients died, while four patients underwent late reoperation for mitral regurgitation (n=2) or infective endocarditis (n=2). Major event-free survival at five years was 87.6%. Late echocardiographic profiles (>6 months) were obtained in 295 (95.2%) patients. During follow-up, 32 (10.8%) patients developed significant mitral regurgitation (MR > grade 2), while freedom from significant MR at five years was 86.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic MV repair is a safe procedure with acceptable postoperative results, including low early postoperative morbidity and mortality and acceptable long-term repair durability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: