Search

Background and Aim of the Study: The advantages of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (AVR) are well documented, but whether the benefits extend to subsequent reoperative aortic valve surgery and beyond is unknown. The study aim was to compare in-hospital outcomes and long-term survival following reoperative AVR between patients who had previous undergone either minimally invasive AVR (mini-AVR) or full sternotomy AVR (sAVR)., Methods: All reoperative, isolated AVRs performed between July 1997 and September 2013 at the authors' institution, with or without non-complex aortic surgery, were identified. Patients were excluded if AVR was not isolated, had occurred prior to July 1997, or if the initial AVR was performed before the patient was aged 18 years. All reoperations were performed through a full sternotomy. The main outcomes of interest were operative results and long-term survival., Results: A total of 101 patients was identified, of which 34 had undergone previous mini-AVR and 67 previous sAVR. The time from the previous AVR was similar in both groups (median 7.6 years overall). Of previous valve implants, 57 were bioprostheses and 44 mechanical; structural valve degeneration was the most common indication for surgery (43/101). Mini-AVR and sAVR patients did not differ significantly with regards to patient demographics and preoperative risk factors. A strong trend towards shorter skin-to-skin operative times was observed for mini-AVR (330 min versus 356 min; p = 0.053). Postoperatively, mini-AVR patients had a shorter ventilation time (5.7 h versus 8.4 h; p = 0.005), intensive care unit stay (37 h versus 63 h; p ≤ 0.001) and hospital length of stay (6.5 days versus 8.0 days; p = 0.038). There was one operative mortality in the sAVR, and none in the mini-AVR group. Mid-term survival at one and five years for mini-AVR was 100% (95% CI 100-100) and 100% (95% CI 100-100), and for sAVR was 93.9% (95% CI 88.2-99.7) and 85.0% (95% CI 75.1-94.9), respectively (p = 0.041)., Conclusion: Mini-AVR confers benefits during subsequent reoperative AVR, with shorter hospital stays and improved long-term survival. These findings suggest that mini-AVR should be considered for patients at risk for aortic valve reoperation, and describes a previously unreported advantage of this well-established technique.

Background and Aim of the Study: The study aim was to determine the safety and benefits of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery without aortic cross-clamping for mitral valve surgery after previous cardiac surgery., Methods: Between January 2006 and August 2008, a total of 90 consecutive patients (38 females, 52 males; mean age 66 +/- 9 years) underwent minimally invasive mitral valve surgery after having undergone previous cardiac surgery. Of these patients, 80 (89%) underwent mitral valve replacement and 10 (11%) mitral valve repair utilizing a small (5 cm) right lateral thoracotomy along the 4th or 5th intercostal space under fibrillatory arrest (mean temperature 28 +/- 2 degrees C). The predicted mortality, calculated using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) algorithm, was compared to the observed mortality., Results: The mean ejection fraction was 45 +/- 13%, mean NYHA class 3 +/- 1, while 66 patients (73%) had previous coronary artery bypass grafting and 37 (41%) had previous valve surgery. Twenty-six patients (29%) underwent non-elective surgery. Cardiopulmonary bypass was instituted through axillary (n = 19), femoral (n = 70) or direct use aortic (n = 1) cannulation. Operative mortality was 2% (2/90), lower than the STS-predicted mortality of 7%. Three patients (3%) developed acute renal failure postoperatively, one patient (1%) required new-onset hemodialysis, and one (1%) developed postoperative stroke. No patients developed postoperative myocardial infarction. The mean postoperative packed red blood cell transfusion requirement at 48 h was 2 +/- 3 units., Conclusion: Minimally invasive right thoracotomy without aortic cross-clamping is an excellent alternative to conventional redo-sternotomy for reoperative mitral valve surgery. The present study confirmed that this technique is safe and effective in reducing operative mortality in high-risk patients undergoing reoperative cardiac surgery.

A 33-year-old, previously healthy male presented with respiratory distress and underwent intubation. A physical examination revealed a holosystolic murmur and pupillary abnormalities. Echocardiography revealed a flail anterior mitral valve leaflet with ruptured chordae and severe mitral regurgitation. The patient underwent urgent mitral valve replacement and tolerated the procedure well. The mitral valve leaflet was myxomatous and calcified -- an unusual find in such a patient. An ophthalmology consultation was obtained and the patient diagnosed with Axenfeld-Rieger syndrome, a disorder of the anterior ocular chamber that has been associated with cardiac malformations. The present case report adds to the body of literature which suggests a correlation between Axenfeld-Rieger syndrome and valvular abnormalities. Hence, it is believed prudent that patients with Axenfeld-Rieger syndrome should undergo echocardiographic screenings for valvular abnormalities.

Background and Aim of the Study: Currently, there is no clear consensus on the optimal type of cardiac valve prosthesis that should be placed in women of childbearing age. The risks of reoperative surgery for bioprosthetic valves must be weighed against those of anticoagulation therapy required for mechanical valves. Bioprosthetic valves placed in women of childbearing age are not necessarily superior to mechanical valves in terms of maternal or fetal outcomes., Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of early and late outcome in 103 women of childbearing age (mean age 28.3 +/- 5.1 years; range: 18-35 years) who underwent mechanical (n = 63) or biological (n = 40) valve replacement between January 1982 and July 2002., Results: Eleven of the 40 women (28%) with biological valves had 19 pregnancies (13 vaginal births; three caesarean sections). Twelve of the 63 women (19%) with mechanical valves had 37 pregnancies (nine vaginal births, four caesarean sections). All of the women with mechanical valves became pregnant while receiving warfarin, and were subsequently placed on heparin or enoxaparin. No bleeding complications or birth defects were observed in either group. The incidence of miscarriages (32% (12/37) versus 11% (2/19), p = 0.09) and therapeutic abortions (32.4% (12/37) versus 5.3% (1/19), p = 0.06) were greater in the group with mechanical valves than with bioprosthetic valves. Freedom from reoperation at five and 10 years for biological versus mechanical valves was 79% versus 90%, and 38% versus 82%, respectively (p < 0.01), with no reoperative mortality., Conclusion: Biological valves are recommended in women of childbearing age, despite the fact that no birth defects were seen in children born to women with mechanical valves on warfarin, because the teratogenic effects of warfarin may be masked by the high rate of miscarriages and therapeutic abortions in this group.

Background and Aim of the Study: Mitral valve repair has been shown superior to valve replacement for the treatment of non-infectious valve disease. The criteria and results of valve repair for native valve endocarditis are still being defined. The study aim was to examine the short- and long-term results of mitral valve repair and replacement for acute infective endocarditis and to define criteria for the use of each technique., Methods: A total of 53 consecutive patients who presented with acute native mitral valve infective endocarditis (diagnosed less than six weeks before surgery) between January 1992 and June 2002 was retrospectively analyzed., Results: Twenty-one patients (40%) underwent mitral valve repair, and 32 (60%) underwent valve replacement. Operative mortality was 0% for the repair group and 13% (4/32) for the replacement group (p = 0.14). Median follow up was 4 years (range: 6-108 months). At five years follow up, a median ejection fraction (EF) of 60% and mitral regurgitation (MR) grade of 1/4 was observed, with an overall late survival of 85% (19/21), in the repair group, while the replacement group had a median EF of 55% and an overall late survival of 73% (p = 0.73). Recurrent endocarditis occurred in 2/21 (10%) in the repair group and 1/32 (3%) in the replacement group (p = 0.34)., Conclusion: Mitral valve repair is a safe and effective technique to treat acute native mitral valve infective endocarditis with favorable short- and long-term morbidity and mortality. Patients with advanced endocarditis and annular destruction require valve replacement. Mitral valve repair should be performed when technically feasible.