Introduction:
Increasing life expectancy in the western world and improvements in surgical techniques and postoperative care have resulted in a significant number of patients aged over 80 undergoing cardiac operations. At times of transapical and transfemoral AVR we aimed to evaluate the feasibility of partial sternotomy for patients over 80 years of age and to compare these results with a historical group of octogenarians who underwent aortic valve surgery via full sternotomy in our department between 1998 and 2006.
Methods:
72 of the 275 patients (26.2 %) who underwent aortic valve replacement (AVR) after partial sternotomy between 8/2009 and 05/2013 were octogenarians. Mean age was 83.1 ± 3.9 years (group ps).
We compared this group with 165 patients (mean age 81.6 ± 3.1 years) who underwent AVR via full sternotomy between 1998 and 2006 (group fs).
Results:
ICU- and hospital stay were significantly reduced in patients with partial sternotomy (ps: 28 ± 9 hours, 12.8 ± 4.7 days vs. fs: 59 ± 15 h, 14.7 ± 3.5 d, p<0.05). We found a higher in-hospital mortality in group fs, but without significance (4.2 vs. 2.8 % in ps). Duration of operation, of extracorporeal circulation, and of aortic cross-clamping was tendentially prolonged in patients with partial sternotomy (p>0.05). Necessity for re-operation due to bleeding was comparable in both groups (ps: 2.8 % vs. fs: 3.0 %).
The incidence of postoperative complications did not differ significantly between both groups: neurological complications (ps: 2.8 vs. fs: 3.0 %), sternal wound infections (2.8 % vs. 2.4 %) and postoperative LCOS (4.2 % vs. 5.5 %).
Conclusions:
We could prove the feasibility of ministernotomy for aortic valve surgery for patients over 80 years of age. Despite a tendentially prolonged duration of surgery compared to procedures via full sternotomy, we found a comparable morbidity and a reduced mortality after partial sternotomy. From an economic perspective, the reduction of intensive care unit- and hospital stay after minimally invasive access was the most interesting finding. Moreover, our results after minimally invasive AVR have to be considered carefully when selecting patients for a conventional or for a TAVI procedure.
Introduction: minimally invasive aortic valve surgery supplement
