Comparative Analysis of Long-Term Outcomes in Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Reimplantation: Full Sternotomy versus Mini-Sternotomy Approach.

Background: Aortic valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) David procedure has not been routinely performed via minimally invasive access due to its complexity. Methods: We compared our results for mini-VSARR to sternotomy-VSARR from another excellence center. Results: Eighty-four patients, 62 in the sternotomy-VSARR group and 22 in the mini-VSARR group, were included. A baseline, the aneurysm dimensions were higher in the mini-VSARR group. Propensity matching resulted in 17 pairs with comparable characteristics. Aortic cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times were significantly longer in the mini-VSARR group, by 60 and 20 min, respectively (p < 0.001). In-hospital outcomes were comparable between the groups. Drainage volumes were numerically lower, and hospital length of stay was, on average, 3 days shorter (p < 0.001) in the mini-VSARR group. At a median follow-up of 5.5 years, there was no difference in mortality (p = 0.230). Survival at 1, 5 and 10 years was 100%, 100%, and 95% and 95%, 87% and 84% in the mini-VSARR and sternotomy-VSARR groups, respectively. No repeat interventions on the aortic valve were documented. Echocardiographic follow-up was complete in 91% with excellent durability of repair regardless of the approach: no cases of moderate/severe aortic regurgitation were reported in the mini-VSARR group. Conclusions: The favorable outcomes, reduced drainage, and shorter hospital stays associated with the mini-sternotomy approach underscore its potential advantages expanding beyond cosmetic outcome.

Mini-David procedure. Procedural considerations.

The main goal of minimally invasive surgery is to reduce the perioperative trauma, accelerate patient mobilization and reduce the length of hospital stay. Due to the development of modern technology, these treatments can be offered to a wider group of patients. For many years, aortic root surgery consisted of mechanical conduit implantation and, therefore, necessitated life-long anticoagulation. At present, in patients with aortic root aneurysm and significant aortic valve regurgitation, it is possible to perform minimal-access valve sparing surgical procedures. The current paper is a brief description of the surgical technique for aortic root aneurysm surgery with preservation of the patient's own valve using the David procedure.

Transition from Simple V-V to V-A and Hybrid ECMO Configurations in COVID-19 ARDS.

In SARS-CoV-2 patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (V-V ECMO) was shown to provide valuable treatment with reasonable survival in large multi-centre investigations. However, in some patients, conversion to modified ECMO support forms may be needed. In this single-centre retrospective registry, all consecutive patients receiving V-V ECMO between 1 March 2020 to 1 May 2021 were included and analysed. The patient cohort was divided into two groups: those who remained on V-V ECMO and those who required conversion to other modalities. Seventy-eight patients were included, with fourteen cases (18%) requiring conversions to veno-arterial (V-A) or hybrid ECMO. The reasons for the ECMO mode configuration change were inadequate drainage (35.7%), inadequate perfusion (14.3%), myocardial infarction (7.1%), hypovolemic shock (14.3%), cardiogenic shock (14.3%) and septic shock (7.1%). In multivariable analysis, the use of dobutamine (p = 0.007) and a shorter ICU duration (p = 0.047) predicted the conversion. The 30-day mortality was higher in converted patients (log-rank p = 0.029). Overall, only 19 patients (24.4%) survived to discharge or lung transplantation. Adverse events were more common after conversion and included renal, cardiovascular and ECMO-circuit complications. Conversion itself was not associated with mortality in the multivariable analysis. In conclusion, as many as 18% of patients undergoing V-V ECMO for COVID-19 ARDS may require conversion to advanced ECMO support.

Midterm results of less invasive approach to ascending aorta and aortic root surgery.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive aortic valve (AV) surgery has become widely accepted alternative to standard sternotomy. Despite possible reduction in morbidity, this approach is not routinely performed for aortic surgery. Current report aimed to demonstrate early and mid-term outcomes in patients undergoing minimally invasive aortic root- and ascending aorta-replacement with or without concomitant AV replacement (AVR). METHODS: Between 2011 and 2018, 167 selected low- and intermediate risk patients (mean age: 64.1±11.3; 70% men; EuroSCORE II 2.58±3.26) underwent minimally invasive aortic surgery. The "V" shaped partial upper sternotomy was performed through a 6-cm skin incision. Patients were divided into minimally invasive root reimplantation/replacement/remodelling (root RRR), supracoronary aorta replacements (SCAR) and SCAR+AVR. Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival were used. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 3.1 year (max 7.7 years). Of 167 patients, 82 (49%) underwent SCAR; 44 (26%) SCAR + AVR. Forty-one patients (25%) underwent minimally invasive root RRR. Average aortic diameter was 6.00±0.46 cm. The cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross-clamp time were 152.0±46.8 and 101.8±36.8 minutes. There was one conversion to sternotomy. Median intensive care unit stay was 2.0 (IQR: 1.0-3.0) days. Thirty-day mortality was 1%. Within investigated follow-up, there was one late reoperation due to aortic valve thrombosis; late survival was estimated at 95% without differences between types of surgery: hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI: 0.36-1.81; P=0.61. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive aortic surgery performed through "V" shaped partial upper sternotomy is feasible and safe in selected patients regardless of the extent of repair, from supracoronary aorta replacements to complex root surgery.

Pilot study of totally thoracoscopic periareolar approach for minimally invasive mitral valve surgery. Towards even less invasive?

INTRODUCTION: Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) has become a widely accepted alternative to the standard sternotomy approach for treatment of mitral valve (MV) disease. Because the extent and location of mini-thoracotomies employed for MIMVS vary from center to center, the conclusions regarding superior cosmesis are not generalizable. The totally thoracoscopic periareolar (TTP) - MIMVS technique has been used at our department for minimally invasive cardiac surgery since 2015. AIM: To report early surgical data as well as mid-term outcomes in patients undergoing TTP-MIMVS. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between 2015 and 2017, 48 consecutive patients (mean age: 65.4 ±10; 83% men; EuroSCORE II: 5.1 ±4%) underwent TTP-MIMVS due to mitral and mitral/tricuspid valve (TV) disease; patients' demographics and clinical outcomes were prospectively collected. Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival and freedom from re-intervention were analyzed as well. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 1.7 (max 2.5) years. Of 48 patients, 33 (69%) underwent isolated MV repair, 4 (8%) isolated MV replacement and 11 (23%) MV/TV repair. The cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross-clamp time was 166 ±70 and 103 ±39 min respectively. There was no conversion to either full sternotomy or a mini-thoracotomy approach. Median (interquartile range) duration of intensive care unit stay was 1.2 (1.0-2.0) days. There was one in-hospital death (2.1%) in the TTP-MIMVS group. No strokes or wound infections were observed. Within the investigated follow-up, the freedom from reoperation rate was 96.4%; remote survival was estimated at 96.9%. CONCLUSIONS: The study proved that TTP-minimally invasive surgery was safe and feasible in mitral and tricuspid valve surgery. It has been associated with superior esthetics. Mitral repairs performed through TTP access are durable in mid-term observation.

Implantation of VVI epicardial pacemaker through mini-sternotomy in a patient with superior vena cava occlusion after radiotherapy.

The paper presents a case report of a patient with a superior vena cava occlusion and post-operational (after the implantation of the aortic valve) atrioventricular block, which required constant stimulation. An epicardial VVI pacemaker was implanted through mini-sternotomy in the lower part of the previous operation field with very satisfactory stimulation parameters. Implantation of a screw-in epicardial lead is in some cases the method of choice, which provides efficient and constant heart stimulation.