Back to Search
Start Over
Mini-sternotomy versus conventional sternotomy for aortic valve replacement: a randomised controlled trial
- Source :
- BMJ Open, Vol 11, Iss 1 (2021), BMJ Open, BMJ Open, 2021, Vol.11(1), pp.e041398 [Peer Reviewed Journal]
- Publication Year :
- 2021
- Publisher :
- BMJ, 2021.
-
Abstract
- ObjectiveTo compare clinical and health economic outcomes after manubrium-limited mini-sternotomy (intervention) and conventional median sternotomy (usual care).DesignA single-blind, randomised controlled trial.SettingSingle centre UK National Health Service tertiary hospital.ParticipantsAdult patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) surgery.InterventionsIntervention was manubrium-limited mini-sternotomy performed using a 5–7 cm midline incision. Usual care was median sternotomy performed using a midline incision from the sternal notch to the xiphisternum.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the proportion of patients who received a red cell transfusion postoperatively and within 7 days of index surgery. Secondary outcomes included proportion of patients receiving a non-red cell blood component transfusion and number of units transfused within 7 days and during index hospital stay, quality of life and cost-effectiveness analyses.Results270 patients were randomised, received surgery and contributed to the intention to treat analysis. No difference between mini and conventional sternotomy in red-cell transfusion within 7 days was found; 23/135 patients in each arm received a transfusion, OR 1.0 (95% CI 0.5 to 2.0) and risk difference 0.0 (95% CI −0.1 to 0.1). Mini-sternotomy reduced chest drain losses (mean 181.6 mL (SD 138.7) vs conventional, mean 306·9 mL (SD 348.6)); this did not reduce red-cell transfusions. Mean valve size and postoperative valve function were comparable between mini-sternotomy and conventional groups; 23 mm vs 24 mm and 6/134 moderate or severe aortic regurgitation vs 3/130, respectively. Mini-sternotomy resulted in longer bypass (82.7 min (SD 23.5) vs 59.6 min (SD 15.1)) and cross-clamp times (64.1 min (SD 17.1) vs 46·3 min (SD 10.7)). Conventional sternotomy was more cost-effective with only a 5.8% probability of mini-sternotomy being cost-effective at a willingness to pay of £20 000/QALY (Quality Adjusted Life Years).ConclusionsAVR via mini-sternotomy did not reduce red blood cell transfusion within 7 days following surgery when compared with conventional sternotomy.Trial registration numberISRCTN29567910; Results.
- Subjects :
- Adult
medicine.medical_specialty
medicine.medical_treatment
lcsh:Medicine
030204 cardiovascular system & hematology
State Medicine
law.invention
03 medical and health sciences
0302 clinical medicine
Aortic valve replacement
Quality of life
Randomized controlled trial
law
Blood Component Transfusion
medicine
health economics
Humans
Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures
Single-Blind Method
adult surgery
030212 general & internal medicine
adult intensive & critical care
Retrospective Studies
Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation
clinical trials
Intention-to-treat analysis
business.industry
lcsh:R
General Medicine
medicine.disease
QP
Sternotomy
Surgery
Cardiac surgery
Clinical trial
Treatment Outcome
Median sternotomy
Aortic Valve
Quality of Life
business
RD
cardiac surgery
Subjects
Details
- ISSN :
- 20446055
- Volume :
- 11
- Database :
- OpenAIRE
- Journal :
- BMJ Open
- Accession number :
- edsair.doi.dedup.....b4b50bec49cea872bc8c4d550dcc6b3b
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041398