Minimally invasive cardiac surgeries in 2021: annual report by Japanese society of minimally invasive cardiac surgery.

PURPOSE: Although minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) procedures are widely performed throughout Japan, nationwide data regarding treated cases are limited. Up-to-date results for cardiovascular surgery are vital for quality control in clinical practice. Presented here is the 2021 annual report based on data from the Japan Cardiovascular Surgery Database (JCVSD). METHODS: Records noted in the JCVSD of patients who underwent mitral valve surgery, aortic valve replacement (AVR), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), atrial septum defect (ASD) closure, or cardiac tumor resection via right or left minithoracotomy, as well as thoracoscopic- or port-assisted, or robotic-assisted approaches, in 2021 were examined. Perioperative parameters including mortality and morbidity was evaluated. RESULTS: The 30-day and in-hospital mortalities for isolated mitral valve repair (n = 1211) were 0.1% and 0.2%, respectively, while those for all mitral valve repair (n = 2017) were 0.05% and 0.2%, respectively. More than 100 facilities were found to perform fewer than five MICS mitral valve surgery cases per year. As for MICS-AVR, 30-day and in-hospital mortalities for isolated AVR (n = 818) were 0.5% and 0.5%, respectively, while those for all AVR (n = 987) were 0.6% and 1.1%, respectively. Additionally, those for MICS-CABG (n = 400) were 0.8% and 0.5%, respectively. Those for ASD (n = 183) and cardiac tumor (n = 96), were 0.5% and 0.5%, respectively, and 0% and 1.0%, respectively. CONCLUSION: This is the first report of MICS results of procedures performed in Japan based on the 2021 JCVSD data. Additional results obtained with a similar data collection method are expected and details on MICS are being collected starting 2024.

Successful launch of robot-assisted mitral valve repair in Japan under universal health coverage.

OBJECTIVES: We compared the clinical outcomes of mitral valve repair for mitral regurgitation via the robot-assisted approach and small right thoracotomy approach 3 years after the reimbursement of the robot-assisted approach in Japan. METHODS: Patients who underwent isolated mitral valve repair by minimally invasive approach between 2018 and 2020 from the Japan Cardiovascular Surgery Database were included. Patients in the robot-assisted approach group were matched to the small right thoracotomy approach group based on propensity scores estimated from patient and surgical characteristics. Perioperative outcomes were compared among all cases as well as in subgroups categorized on the basis of the yearly number of robot-assisted approach cases and small right thoracotomy approach cases (≥10 or <10) at the hospital. RESULTS: We identified 2443 patients who had undergone isolated mitral valve repair at 250 institutions in the database, and analysis of propensity-matched 577 patient-pairs demonstrated that operation time, cardiopulmonary bypass time, and aortic crossclamp time were significantly shorter with the robot-assisted approach. Although the intensive care unit stay was longer in the robot-assisted approach, the time to discharge was significantly shorter in the robot-assisted approach. There was no meaningful difference in the in-hospital mortality. The incidences of postoperative stroke, renal failure, and prolonged ventilation, and the number of patients who converted to mitral valve replacement were similarly low. Procedural time, blood transfusions, explorative procedures for bleeding, postoperative stroke, and prolonged ventilation occurred at a lower rate in the high-volume institutions. CONCLUSIONS: The study found that the robot-assisted approach is just as effective as the small right thoracotomy approach. The introduction of robot-assisted mitral valve repair in Japan has been successful.

Descriptive analysis of long-term survival after aortic valve replacement for dialysis patients: importance of renal pathologies and age.

OBJECTIVES: This study analyzed the long-term survival of dialysis patients undergoing AVR using the Japanese National Clinical Database with additional survival data. METHODS: De-novo AVR for dialysis-dependent patients between 2010 and 2012 who were registered in the Japan Cardiovascular Surgery Database were included. Concomitant aortic surgery and transcatheter aortic valve replacement were excluded. An additional questionnaire was sent to each hospital regarding the underlying kidney disease, the duration of dialysis initiation to the surgery, and clinical outcomes. The Kaplan-Meier survival curve was descriptively shown for all cohorts and each renal pathology. Furthermore, we compared the incidence of bioprosthetic valve failure in patients who were < 65 years old (group Y) and ≧65 years old (group O). RESULTS: Of these 1529 patients, diabetic nephropathy was 517, chronic glomerulonephritis was 437, and renal sclerosis was 210, regarding renal pathology. 1, 3, and 5-year survival in each pathology was 78.4%, 58.6%, 45.9% in diabetic nephritis, 78.8%, 68.4%, 58.2% in chronic glomerulonephritis, 79.0%, 67.8%, 52.1% in renal sclerosis, and 74.4%, 62.6%, 49.2% in others. Active infectious endocarditis was more prevalent in group Y (O 2.7% vs. Y 9.6%). The incidence of bioprosthetic valve failure requiring re-hospitalization was too small to analyze. 1, 3, and 5-year survival was 76.0%, 63.4%, 49.2% in group O and 74.3%, 64.2%, and 47.7% in group Y. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term survival of AVR for dialysis-dependent was higher in patients with chronic glomerulonephritis and lower in patients with diabetic nephritis than in other pathologies.

Open Versus Zone 0/1 Endovascular Aortic Repair for Arch Aneurysm: A Propensity Score-Matched Study from the National Clinical Database in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Although open surgical repair (OSR) is the gold standard for treating arch aneurysms, thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) may be a less invasive alternative. However, it remains unclear which of the 2 methods yields better outcomes. In this study, we compared the perioperative outcomes of both procedures for arch aneurysms using a nationwide surgical database. METHODS: Data of patients who underwent elective aortic repair for true arch aneurysms were extracted from the National Clinical Database of Japan. Patients who underwent OSR and Zone 0/1 TEVAR were matched in a 1:1 ratio using propensity scores and their mortality and morbidity rates were compared. RESULTS: A total of 2,815 and 1,125 patients underwent OSR and Zone 0/1 TEVAR, respectively. After propensity score matching, 1,058 patients were included in both groups. Compared with OSR, Zone 0/1 TEVAR was associated with a significantly higher incidence of stroke (5.8 vs. 10.0%, P < 0.001) and paraplegia/paraparesis (1.6 vs. 4.4%, P < 0.001). However, there were no significant differences in the 30-day and operative mortality rates between the 2 groups (2.2 vs. 2.7% and 4.5 vs. 5.4%, respectively). In the Zone 0/1 TEVAR group, postoperative computed tomography was performed in 92.4% of patients, and types I and III endoleaks were identified in 6.4% and 1.1% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Zone 0/1 TEVAR has higher incidences of stroke and paraplegia/paraparesis than OSR, with a risk of postoperative endoleaks. Resolving these problems is the key for expanding the application of Zone 0/1 TEVAR and in the meantime OSR remains the gold standard for surgically fit patients.