Key result
Minimally invasive beating heart technique significantly reduced cardiopulmonary bypass time (130.2 vs 165.2 minutes) and postoperative hospital stay compared to conventional median thoracotomy in patients with giant left ventricle undergoing redo mitral valve surgery.
Why the study?
The feasibility and efficacy of the minimally invasive beating heart technique for redo mitral valve surgery in patients with a giant left ventricle had not been established.
Does a minimally invasive beating heart technique improve perioperative outcomes compared to conventional median thoracotomy in patients with giant left ventricle undergoing redo mitral valve surgery?
Cohort (n=80)
No
Does a minimally invasive beating heart technique improve perioperative outcomes compared to conventional median thoracotomy in patients with giant left ventricle undergoing redo mitral valve surgery?
In patients with giant left ventricle undergoing redo mitral valve surgery, a minimally invasive beating heart technique is feasible and significantly reduces operative times, blood loss, and hospital stay compared to conventional sternotomy.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support feasibility of minimally invasive beating heart redo mitral surgery in giant LV; leaves open randomized efficacy confirmation.
Purpose: To analyze the feasibility and efficacy of minimally invasive beating heart technique for redo mitral valve surgery in the cardiac patients with giant left ventricle.Methods: Eighty cardiac patients with giant left ventricle according to the diagnostic criteria that left ventricular end diastolic diameter (LVEDD) was ≥70 mm,who underwent redo mitral valve surgery at our center from January 2006 to January 2019 were analyzed. We divided all patients into minimally invasive beating heart technique group (n=30) and conventional median thoracotomy arrested heart technique group (n=50) according to the surgical methods. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were compared between two groups.Results: Minimally invasive beating heart technique compared to the conventional median thoracotomy arrested heart technique for redo mitral valve surgery in the cardiac patients with giant left ventricle had significant differences in operation time(P=0.002), cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time(P<0.001), intraoperative blood loss(P<0.001), postoperative transfusion ratio(P=0.01), postoperative transfusion amount(P<0.001), postoperative drainage volume(P=0.001), extubation time(P=0.04), intensive care unit (ICU) stay time(P=0.04) and postoperative hospital stay time(P<0.001), but no significant differences in re-exploration for bleeding, postoperative 30-day mortality, postoperative complications, and six months postoperative echocardiographic parameters.Conclusions: Using the method of minimally invasive beating heart technique for redo mitral valve surgery in the cardiac patients with giant left ventricle is feasible, effective, reliable and cosmetic, meanwhile reduce the operation time and CPB time, decrease the transfusion ratio and transfusion amount, shorten postoperative ICU stay and hospital stay time, promote the early extubation so that accelerate the patients’ early recovery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Redo mitral valve surgery in patients with giant left ventricle (n=80). Minimally invasive beating heart technique vs. Conventional median thoracotomy arrested heart technique was evaluated on Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time (minutes) (p=<0.001). Minimally invasive beating heart technique significantly reduced cardiopulmonary bypass time (130.2 vs 165.2 minutes) and postoperative hospital stay compared to conventional median thoracotomy in patients with giant left ventricle undergoing redo mitral valve surgery.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: