scholarly journals J-ministernotomy for aortic valve replacement: a retrospective cohort study

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad A. Torky ◽  
Amr A. Arafat ◽  
Hosam F. Fawzy ◽  
Abdelhady M. Taha ◽  
Ehab A. Wahby ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The advantage of minimally invasive sternotomy (MS) over full sternotomy (FS) for isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR) is still controversial. We aimed to examine if J-shaped MS is a safe alternative to FS in patients undergoing primary isolated AVR. This study is a retrospective and restricted cohort study that included 137 patients who had primary isolated AVR from February 2013 to June 2015. Patients with previous cardiac operations, low ejection fraction (< 40%), infective endocarditis, EuroSCORE II predicted mortality > 10%, and patients who had inverted T or inverted C-MS or right anterior thoracotomy were excluded. Patients were grouped into the FS group (n=65) and MS group (n=72). Preoperative variables were comparable in both groups. The outcome was studied, balancing the groups by propensity score matching. Results Seven (9%) patients in the MS group were converted to FS. Cardiopulmonary bypass (98.5 ± 29.3 vs. 82.1 ± 13.95 min; p ≤ 0.001) and ischemic times (69.1 ± 23.8 vs. 59.6 ± 12.2 min; p = 0.001) were longer in MS. The MS group had a shorter duration of mechanical ventilation (10.1 ± 11.58 vs. 10.9 ± 6.43 h; p = 0.045), ICU stay (42.74 ± 40.5 vs. 44.9 ± 39.3; p = 0.01), less chest tube drainage (385.3 ± 248.6 vs. 635.9 ± 409.6 ml; p = 0.001), and lower narcotics use (25.14 ± 17.84 vs. 48.23 ± 125.68 mg; p < 0.001). No difference was found in postoperative heart block with permanent pacemaker insertion or atrial fibrillation between groups (p = 0.16 and 0.226, respectively). Stroke, renal failure, and mortality did not differ between the groups. Reintervention-free survival at 1, 3, and 4 years was not significantly different in both groups (p = 0.73). Conclusion J-ministernotomy could be a safe alternative to FS in isolated primary AVR. Besides the cosmetic advantage, it could have better clinical outcomes without added risk.

2015 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 424-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALEXANDER KOGAN ◽  
LEONID STERNIK ◽  
ROY BEINART ◽  
AMJAD SHALABI ◽  
MICHAEL GLIKSON ◽  
...  

Circulation ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 116 (suppl_16) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Lehr ◽  
Elizabeth Allen ◽  
John Mullen ◽  
Roderick MacArthur ◽  
David Ross ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND: Stentless aortic valve prosthesis are thought to provide a superior hemodynamic profile compared to mechanical or other tissue valve replacements. Unlike other aortic valve prostheses, stentless valves are most commonly implanted in the subcoronary position, potentially resulting in the placement of sutures in the atrio-ventricular node of the heart’s conduction system. We assessed the incidence of permanent pacemaker insertion following aortic valve replacement. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of all patients who underwent aortic valve replacement at the University of Alberta Hospital between January 1996 and December 2004. The primary outcome was heart block requiring permanent pacemaker insertion. Binary logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the influence of a number of factors on the requirement for permanent pacemaker insertion. RESULTS: In total, 1,451 patients underwent aortic valve replacement (69% male, age 17–92). Permanent pacemaker insertion was required in 32 (5.0%) of 644 patients receiving mechanical valves and in 24 (4.4%) of 543 patients who had a stented tissue aortic valve replacement. In contrast, 27 (10.2%) of 264 patients who had a stentless bioprosthetic valves implanted developed heart block necessitating permanent pacemaker insertion (P = 0.02). Logistic regression demonstrated that implantation of a stentless tissue valve and postoperative inotropic support were the only two significant predictors of the development of heart block following aortic valve replacement. CONCLUSIONS: Aortic valve replacement with a stentless valve prosthesis increases the risk of heart block and the requirement for permanent cardiac pacing. Multivariate predictors of requirement for permanent pacemaker


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document