Early Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery versus Standard Median Sternotomy Technique
/ 0
- Details
- Category: Vol. 93, March 2025
- Hits: 24
Early Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery versus Standard Median Sternotomy Technique, HASSAN A. MOUSTAFA, MOSTAFA A. ABD EL-GAWAD, HOSSAM EL-DIN A. ABD EL-HAMID, RAMY M.R. KHORSHID and ASHRAF M.I. BASSIONY
Abstract
Background: Mitral Valve Surgery (MVS) performed through a Standard Median Sternotomy can be particularly technically challenging and is known to carry a potential risk of injuries to patent coronary artery bypass grafts and vascular structures that lie directly substernally and can adhere to the sternum. Postoperative complications after cardiac surgery, particu larly when occurring in combination, have a profound impact on long-term early, survival and postoperative deaths. Aim of Study: To evaluate the early outcomes of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery versus standard median sternoto my technique in patients undergoing mitral valve surgery. Patients and Methods: A retrospective comparative study that is conducted on cases candidate minimally invasive mitral valve surgery versus standard median sternotomy technique. Results: This study was conducted on 40 patients; 18 of them (45%) having isolated mitral valve disease, 22 (55%) hav ing mitral plus tricuspid valve disease. All the patients com pleted the study. There was no mortality among the patients. The patients were classified into 2 groups: - Group A: minimally invasive group. This group includes 20 patients requiring mitral valve surgery, and was approached through right anterolateral minithoracotomy. - Group B: Sternotomy group. This group includes 20 patients requiring mitral valve surgery, and was approached through conventional median sternotomy. Conclusion: According to the findings in the current study, minimally invasive mitral valve surgery is a safe procedure, as sociated with a low incidence of intraoperative complications and excellent postoperative outcomes. However, the cost-ef fectiveness remains controversial. Therefore, additional multi center studies are needed to make econometric analysis for any future evaluation of novel cardiovascular therapies.