Search

Introduction Aortic valve reimplantation is considered technically demanding. We searched for predictors of long-term outcome including the surgeon as risk factor. Methods We selected all aortic valve reimplantations performed in our department between December 1999 and January 2017 and obtained a complete follow-up. The main indications were combined aortic aneurysm plus aortic valve regurgitation (AR), 69% and aortic dissections (15%). In 14%, valves were bicuspid. Cusp repair was performed in 27% of patients. One-third received additional procedures (coronary artery bypass grafting, mitral, or arch surgery). We performed multivariable analyses for independent risk factors of short- and long-term outcomes, including "surgeon" as variable. Twelve different surgeons operated on 193 patients. We created three groups: surgeons A and B with 84 and 64 procedures, respectively, and surgeon C (10 surgeons for 45 patients). Results Cardiopulmonary bypass and clamp times were 176 ± 45 and 130 ± 24 minutes, respectively. In-hospital mortality was 2%. Postoperatively, 5% had mild and 0.5% had moderate AR. Kaplan–Meier's survival estimates, freedom from reoperation, and freedom from severe AR at 12 years were 97 ± 1, 93 ± 2, and 91 ± 3%, respectively. Age and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease appeared as risk factors for perioperative complications by univariate analysis. Age, coronary artery disease, and duration of cardiopulmonary bypass, but not surgeon, presented as risk factors by multivariable analysis. Conclusion The results suggest that if a David procedure is performed successfully, long-term durability may be excellent. They also suggest that good and durable results are possible even with limited experience of the operating surgeon. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) using bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) is associated with the best long-term survival. However, using BITA increases the risk of sternal wound infections with conventional sternotomy. We describe here our initial results of minimally invasive CABG (MICS-CABG) using BITA. Methods Patients were operated through an incision similar to that of standard minimally invasive direct CABG. All operations were performed off-pump. We evaluated patient's quality of life (QoL) using the Medical Outcomes trust, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). Results Between February 2016 and August 2017, we performed 21 cases of MICS-CABG using BITA. There was no intraoperative complication and no conversion to sternotomy or to on-pump. Two patients required reexploration through the same minithoracotomy for postoperative bleeding. Two cases of early postoperative graft failure were identified. There was no stroke or in-hospital mortality. The median duration of follow-up was 13 months, with a maximum of 19 months. Relief of angina was achieved in all patients. There was one readmission for superficial wound infection, which was conservatively treated. An 84-year-old man died 4 months after the operation. The remaining 20 patients attested good QoL with the SF-36 questionnaire. Conclusions Myocardial revascularization using BITA can be safely achieved off-pump through a left-sided minithoracotomy with good postoperative and short-term outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Minimally invasive surgery is increasingly performed for isolated aortic or mitral valve procedures. However, combined minimally invasive aortic and mitral valve surgery is rare. We report our initial experience performing multiple valve procedures through a right-sided mini-thoracotomy (RMT) compared with sternotomy., Methods: A total of 264 patients underwent aortic and mitral with or without tricuspid valve surgery through RMT ( n  = 25) or sternotomy ( n  = 239). Propensity score matching was used for outcome comparisons., Results: Of the 264 patients, 25 (age: 72 ± 10 years; 72% male) underwent double ( n  = 19) and triple valve surgery ( n  = 6) through RMT and 239 (age: 71 ± 11 years; 54% male) underwent double ( n  = 176) and triple valve surgery ( n  = 63) through sternotomy. Sternotomy patients had more co-morbidities and preoperative risk factors (EuroSCORE II 10.25 ± 10.89 vs. RMT 3.58. ± 4.98; p  < 0.001). RMT procedures were uneventful without intraoperative complications or conversions to sternotomy. After propensity score matching, surgical procedures were comparable between groups with a higher valve repair rate in RMT. Despite longer cardiopulmonary bypass times in RMT, there was no evidence for differences in 30-day mortality (RMT: n  = 2 vs. sternotomy: n  = 2) and there were no significant differences in other outcomes. During 5-year follow-up, reoperation was required in sternotomy patients only ( n  = 2). Follow-up echocardiography showed durable results after valve surgery. RMT patients showed higher survival probability compared with sternotomy, although this difference was not significant (hazard ratio = 0.33; 95% confidence interval: 0.06-1.65; p  = 0.18)., Conclusion: Combined aortic plus mitral with or without tricuspid valve surgery can safely be performed through a RMT with a trend toward better mid-term outcomes., Competing Interests: None declared., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)