Why the study?
Does minimally invasive aortic valve replacement improve postoperative outcomes in high-risk patient groups?
Does minimally invasive aortic valve replacement improve postoperative outcomes in high-risk patient groups?
This review aims to assess whether the benefits of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement observed in low-risk patients can be transferred to high-risk patient groups.
Suggests minimally invasive approaches may be feasible in high-risk surgical patients; leaves open.
Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (AVR) aims to preserve the sternal integrity and improve postoperative outcomes. In low risk patients, this technique can be achieved with comparable mortality to the conventional approach and there is evidence of possible reduction in intensive care and hospital length of stay, transfusion requirement, renal dysfunction, improved respiratory function and increased patient satisfaction. In this review, we aim to asses if these benefits can be transferred to the high risk patient groups. We therefore, discuss the available evidence for the following high risk groups: elderly patients, re-operative surgery, poor lung function, pulmonary hypertension, obesity, concomitant procedures and high risk score cohorts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fudulu et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: