Robotic mitral surgery: recent advances and outcomes.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review explores recent advancements in robotic cardiac surgery, specifically focusing on its application in diverse mitral valve surgeries. The aim is to provide an overview of current clinical practices and supporting evidence in this evolving field. RECENT FINDINGS: A literature review indicates a 30% surge in robotic mitral valve repair from 2015 to 2021, paralleled by a decline in sternotomy-based repair per the STS database. Robotic mitral valve repair consistently shows effective and safe outcomes, with comparable mortality but lower morbidity risks than sternotomy and thoracotomy. The robotic approach exhibits lower conversion to valve replacement, shorter ICU stays, and reduced 30-day readmissions. For experienced programs, robotic techniques prove versatile in various pathologies, including rheumatic heart valve disease, infective endocarditis, ischemic cardiomyopathy, and mitral annular calcification necessitating valve replacement. Literature supports their selective use in high-risk scenarios, including redo surgeries and elderly patients. SUMMARY: Recent evidence supports the growing use of robotic approaches in mitral valve surgery, highlighting their efficacy with comparable mortality rates but lower morbidity risks. Robotic techniques consistently yield positive outcomes across various pathologies and patient profiles, signaling a potential paradigm shift in mitral valve interventions.

Erector Spinae Regional Anesthesia for Robotic Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Is Not Associated With Reduced Postoperative Opioid Use: A Retrospective Observational Study.

OBJECTIVE: Regional anesthesia techniques are gaining traction in cardiac surgery. The aim of this study was to compare the analgesic efficacy of erector spinae plane block catheters (ESPBC), serratus anterior plane block catheters (SAPBC), and paravertebral single-shot block (PVB) versus no block after robotic minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB). DESIGN: This was a retrospective observational study of routinely recorded data. SETTING: The study was performed at a single healthcare system. PARTICIPANTS: All patients underwent robotic MIDCAB. INTERVENTION: Data were analyzed from 346 patients during a 53-month period. The clinical data warehouse was queried for all robotic MIDCAB surgeries. Variables abstracted included type of nerve block, age, sex, use of adjuncts, Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted short length of stay (PSLOS), total opioid consumption during the 72 hours after surgery, and postoperative hospital length of stay (LOS). The primary outcome was total oral morphine milligram equivalents (MME) consumed during the first 72 hours after surgery. The secondary outcome was hospital LOS. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In a model adjusting for PSLOS, the authors did not observe an association between ESPBC and the reduction of total administered oral MME within 72 hours after surgery. There was no significant difference in MME when comparing patients who received PVB to patients with ESPBC. Older age and female sex were associated with significantly lower MME. Patients who received ESPBC had a significantly shorter hospital LOS than patients with SAPBC. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggested that postoperative pain after MIDCAB surgery might not be completely covered by ESPBC. Prospective studies are needed to further elucidate the value of this technique for robotic MIDCAB.

Outcomes of convergent atrial fibrillation ablation with continuous rhythm monitoring.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes of catheter ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation (PeAF) are suboptimal. The convergent procedure (CP) may offer improved efficacy by combining endocardial and epicardial ablation. METHODS: We reviewed 113 consecutive patients undergoing the CP at our institution. The cohort was divided into two groups based on the presence (n = 92) or absence (n = 21) of continuous rhythm monitoring (CM) following the CP. Outcomes were reported in two ways. First, using a conventional definition of any atrial fibrillation/atrial tachycardia (AF/AT) recurrence lasting >30 seconds, after a 90 day blanking period. Second, by determining AF/AT burden at relevant time points in the group with CM. RESULTS: Across the entire cohort, 88% had either persistent or long-standing persistent AF, mean duration of AF diagnosis before the CP was 5.1 ± 4.6 years, 45% had undergone at least one prior AF ablation, 31% had impaired left ventricle ejection fraction and 62% met criteria for moderate or severe left atrial enlargement. Mean duration of follow-up after the CP was 501 ± 355 days. In the entire cohort, survival free from any AF/AT episode >30 seconds at 12 months after the blanking period was 53%. However, among those in the CM group who experienced recurrences, mean burden of AF/AT was generally very low (<5%) and remained stable over the duration of follow-up. Ten patients (9%) required elective cardioversion outside the 90 day blanking period, 11 patients (9.7%) underwent repeat ablation at a mean of 229 ± 178 days post-CP and 64% were off AADs at the last follow-up. Procedural complications decreased significantly following the transition from transdiaphragmatic to sub-xiphoid surgical access: 23% versus 3.8% (P = .005) CONCLUSIONS: In a large, consecutive series of patients with predominantly PeAF, the CP was capable of reducing AF burden to very low levels (generally <5%), which appeared durable over time. Complication rates associated with the CP decreased significantly with the transition from transdiaphragmatic to sub-xiphoid surgical access. Future trials will be necessary to determine which patients are most likely to benefit from the convergent approach.

Hybrid coronary revascularization: are we there yet?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: With advances in minimally invasive surgical and percutaneous coronary therapies, hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) is well positioned to be an ideal strategy for revascularization in selected patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). The purpose of this review is to highlight recent outcomes and comparative effectiveness studies of HCR. RECENT FINDINGS: Patients undergoing HCR have comparable outcomes compared with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The major benefits compared with CABG appear to be related to short-term morbidity and resource utilization. Compared with PCI, HCR may decrease repeat revascularization rates by decreasing reintervention of the left anterior descending coronary artery. SUMMARY: Although HCR is associated with a significant learning curve, specifically with minimally invasive CABG techniques, the early outcomes remain promising and should be considered as a viable option for revascularization in select patients with multivessel CAD.

Hybrid coronary revascularization versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) compared to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for the treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease (MVCAD). BACKGROUND: HCR involves a combination of surgical and percutaneous techniques, which in selected patients may present an alternative to conventional CABG. METHODS: Databases were searched through June 30, 2016, and studies comparing HCR with CABG for treatment of MVCAD were selected. We calculated summary odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs with the random-effects model. The primary outcome of interest was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), defined as a composite of all cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke. RESULTS: The analysis included 2,245 patients from 8 studies (1 randomized controlled trial and 7 observational studies). The risk of MACCE with HCR and CABG were 3.6% and 5.4%, respectively (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.24-1.16). Compared to CABG group, patients in HCR group had similar risk of all cause mortality (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.38-1.88), myocardial infarction (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.31-1.64), stroke (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.23-1.20), and repeat revascularization (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.58-2.83). The need for postoperative blood transfusions (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.14-0.59) and hospital stay (weighted mean difference -1.20 days; 95% CI -1.52 to -0.88 days) was significantly lower in the HCR group. CONCLUSION: HCR appears to be safe, and has similar outcomes when compared with conventional CABG. HCR can be a suitable alternative to conventional CABG in select patients with MVCAD. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Association of Serratus Anterior Plane Block for Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery With Higher Opioid Consumption: A Retrospective Observational Study.

OBJECTIVE: The optimal regional technique for minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) has yet to be determined. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of ultrasound-guided serratus anterior plane block (SAPB) with paravertebral block (PVB) and no block for controlling acute thoracotomy pain after robotic-assisted coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). DESIGN: This is a retrospective study. Multiple variable regression analyses were performed. SETTING: The study was performed as a single institution. PARTICIPANTS: All patients underwent robotic-assisted CABG. INTERVENTION: Data were analyzed from 197 patients during a 27-month period. Charts were abstracted manually to ascertain type of nerve block, age, gender, use of home opioids, use of adjuncts for opioid reduction, Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted long length of stay (LOS), total opioid consumption during the 72 hours after surgery, and postoperative LOS. The authors' primary outcome was total morphine equivalents consumed during the first 72 hours after surgery. The secondary outcome was hospital LOS. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients who received SAPB did not have significantly different opioid consumption than patients who had no block (p = 0.15), but it was increased significantly compared to patients administered PVB (PVB v SAPB catheter, p = 0.049; PVB v SAPB single shot, p = 0.049). There were no significant differences between groups in terms of postoperative LOS. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest SAPB might not cover adequately the incisional and tube pain associated with MIDCAB. If validated by prospective studies, these findings suggest that SAPB should be considered only for patients who are not candidates for PVB.

Practice patterns and clinical outcomes after hybrid coronary revascularization in the United States: an analysis from the society of thoracic surgeons adult cardiac database.

BACKGROUND: Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) involves a combination of surgical and percutaneous techniques, which in selected patients may present an alternative to conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients were included who underwent HCR (staged/concurrent) or isolated CABG in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database (July 2011 to March 2013). HCR represented 0.48% (n=950; staged=809, concurrent=141) of the total CABG volume (n=198,622) during the study period, and was performed in one-third of participating centers (n=361). Patients who underwent HCR had higher cardiovascular risk profiles in comparison with patients undergoing CABG. In comparison with CABG, median sternotomy (98.5% for CABG, 61.1% for staged HCR, and 52.5% for concurrent HCR), direct vision harvesting (98.9%, 66.0%, and 68.1%) and cardiopulmonary bypass (83.4%, 45%, and 36.9%) were less frequently used for staged and concurrent HCR, whereas robotic assistance (0.7%, 33.0%, and 30.5%) was more common. After adjustment, no differences were observed for the composite of in-hospital mortality and major morbidity (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-1.16; P=0.53 for staged HCR, and odds ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-1.56; P=0.80 for concurrent HCR in comparison with CABG). There was no statistically significant association between operative mortality and either treatment group (odds ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.42-1.30; P=0.29 for staged HCR, and odds ratio, 2.26; 95% confidence interval, 0.99-5.17; P=0.053 for concurrent HCR in comparison with CABG). CONCLUSION: HCR, either as a staged or concurrent procedure, is performed in one-third of US hospitals and is reserved for a highly selected patient population. Although HCR may appear to be an equally safe alternative for CABG surgery, further randomized study is warranted.

A nationwide survey on perception, experience, and expectations of hybrid coronary revascularization among top-ranked US hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) combines a surgical and percutaneous approach for treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease. METHODS: A survey was conducted among 200 cardiologists and cardiac surgeons from 100 top-ranked US hospitals. Questions were asked involving the perception, experience, and future expectations of HCR. RESULTS: Of physicians invited to the survey, 90 completed the survey (45.5%). Relative to nonresponders, responders were more often affiliated with an academic institution (80.0% vs 61.8%, P=.005), with higher patient volumes, and with the availability of a hybrid operating room (90.0% vs 67.3%, P<.001). Survey responders felt that HCR should be considered in an older and relatively healthy patient population without complex lesions. Cardiac surgeons were more favorable to use HCR in patients with chronic lung disease (42.0% vs 10.0%, P<.001) or renal failure (28.0% vs 15.0%, P=.06). Among responders with HCR experience (n=54), 94% reported good to excellent results, and the learning curve differed depending on the surgical technique used. Inappropriate patient selection (41.2%) was the most common cause for complications. Three-quarter of responders believe that the future role for HCR will expand in the next decade. Important determinants of greater HCR use in the future were collaborative associations between cardiac surgeons and cardiologists (86.7%), appropriate patient selection (67.8%), and the outcomes of ongoing clinical trials (57.8%). CONCLUSION: In this nationwide survey, cardiologists and cardiac surgeons felt that HCR is a reasonable alternative technique for coronary revascularization among suitable patients. Most felt that use of HCR would increase in the next decade.

Correction of Adult Scimitar Syndrome Using a Lateral Endoscopic Approach with Robotics.

We present two adult patients in whom anatomic correction of scimitar syndrome (SS) was accomplished by redirecting the anomalous pulmonary venous drainage into the left atrium using a reinforced polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) graft extension. A right lateral endoscopic approach with robotic instrumentation (LEAR) was utilized with excellent early and long-term results.

Clinical outcomes after hybrid coronary revascularization versus coronary artery bypass surgery: a meta-analysis of 1,190 patients.

BACKGROUND: Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) represents a minimally invasive revascularization strategy in which the durability of the internal mammary artery to left anterior descending artery graft is combined with percutaneous coronary intervention to treat remaining lesions. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare clinical outcomes after HCR with conventional coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. METHODS: A comprehensive EMBASE and PUBMED search was performed for comparative studies evaluating in-hospital and 1-year death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and repeat revascularization. RESULTS: Six observational studies (1 case control, 5 propensity adjusted) comprising 1,190 patients were included; 366 (30.8%) patients underwent HCR (185 staged and 181 concurrent), and 824 (69.2%) were treated with CABG (786 off-pump, 38 on-pump). Drug-eluting stents were used in 328 (89.6%) patients undergoing HCR. Hybrid coronary revascularization was associated with lower in-hospital need for blood transfusions, shorter length of stay, and faster return to work. No significant differences were found for the composite of death, MI, stroke, or repeat revascularization during hospitalization (odds ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.25-1.58, P = .33) and at 1-year follow-up (odds ratio 0.49, 95% CI 0.20-1.24, P = .13). Comparisons of individual components showed no difference in all-cause mortality, MI, or stroke, but higher repeat revascularization among patients treated with HCR. CONCLUSIONS: Hybrid coronary revascularization is associated with lower morbidity and similar in-hospital and 1-year major adverse cerebrovascular or cardiac events rates, but greater requirement for repeat revascularization compared with CABG. Further exploration of this strategy with adequately powered randomized trials is warranted.

Clinical outcomes of hybrid coronary revascularization versus coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) involves minimally invasive left internal mammary artery to left anterior descending coronary artery grafting combined with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of non-left anterior descending vessels. The safety and efficacy of HCR among diabetic patients are unknown. METHODS: Patients with diabetes were included who underwent HCR at a US academic center between October 2003 and September 2013. These patients were matched 1:5 to similar patients treated with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) using a propensity score (PS)-matching algorithm. Conditional logistic regression and Cox regression stratified on matched pairs were performed to evaluate the association between HCR and inhospital complications, a composite measure of 30-day mortality, myocardial infarction and stroke, and up to 3-year all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Of 618 patients (HCR = 103; CABG = 515) in the PS-matched cohort, the 30-day composite of death, MI, or stroke after HCR and CABG was 4.9% and 3.9% (odds ratio: 1.25; 95% CI [0.47-3.33]; P = .66). Compared with CABG, HCR also had similar need for reoperation (7.6% versus 6.3%; P = .60) and renal failure (4.2% versus 4.9%; P = .76) but required less blood products (31.4% versus. 65.8%; P < .0001), lower chest tube drainage (655 mL [412-916] versus 898 mL [664-1240]; P < .0001), and shorter length of stay (<5 days: 48.3% versus 25.3%; P < .0001). Over a 3-year follow-up period, mortality was similar after HCR and CABG (12.3% versus 14.9%, hazard ratio: 0.94, 95% CI [0.47-1.88]; P = .86). CONCLUSION: Among diabetic patients, the use of HCR appears to be safe and has similar longitudinal outcomes but is associated with less blood product usage and faster recovery than conventional CABG surgery.

Long-term survival for patients with metabolic syndrome after bioprosthetic or mechanical valve replacement.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic diseases are thought to negatively impact the long-term survival of cardiac patients and have been shown to be associated with reduced durability of bioprosthetic heart valves. The purpose of this study is to determine whether long-term survival of post-valve replacement patients is affected by the presence of metabolic disease, and whether choice of tissue versus mechanical prosthesis impacts survival. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of all isolated valve replacements performed between 2002 and 2011 from the STS adult cardiac database of Emory Healthcare Hospitals. A total of 1,222 cases were reviewed, of which 909 patients had AVR (661 tissue, 248 mechanical), and 313 MVR (190 tissue, 123 mechanical). Cardiometabolic syndrome (CMS), in accordance with the World Health Organization (WHO) definition, was present in 242 of 1,222 (19.8%) cases in entire cohort, 203 of 909 (22.3%) in AVR, and 39 of 313 (12.5%) in MVR. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to calculate long-term survival after adjusting for propensity score (PS), Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS PROM), and direct covariates for valve and implant type and stratifying by CMS. RESULTS: In PS adjusted AVR, patients with CMS risk factors had worse survival compared to metabolic risk-free patients (AHR = 3.47), as was the case for MVR (AHR = 4.06). Tissue MVR patients with CMS had higher hazard of death compared to patients with no diabetes and no metabolic risk factors after adjusting for PROM (AHR = 3.33) and direct covariates (AHR = 3.91). CONCLUSIONS: Metabolic diseases negatively impact long-term survival of aortic and mitral valve replacement (MVR) patients. Tissue prostheses are associated with worse long-term survival following MVR.

Minimally Invasive CABG Is The Future: Pro.

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains one of the most commonly performed operations worldwide. However, most CABG operations performed today are as invasive -apart from saphenous vein harvesting- as they were 50 years ago. While heart valve operations have become less invasive, CABG faces formidable challenges in doing so. Valve surgery requires a single surgical exposure to the valve intervened on, but less invasive CABG necessitates multiple surgical exposures to harvest internal thoracic artery conduits, source their inflow plus that of other grafts, and expose each coronary target to be grafted -including anterior, lateral, posterior, and inferior vessels. In this article, we rationalize why we believe that conventional CABG remains unduly invasive, associated with morbidity and prolonged recovery, and why less invasive CABG in its many forms, which we describe, represents a safe, practical, diffusible, and less invasive alternative to sternotomy CABG. Centers of excellence in coronary artery surgery should dedicate resources and expertise to developing high-quality, safe, durable, and advanced forms of lesser invasive CABG.

Teaching the next generation of robotic coronary surgeons.

Robotic-assisted coronary bypass is an attractive option in the management of patients with isolated left anterior descending artery (LAD) disease or multi-vessel coronary disease providing the benefits of the left internal mammary artery (LIMA) to the LAD graft while avoiding the morbidity of a sternotomy. Although the learning curve is significant, both cardiothoracic surgery trainees as well as experienced coronary surgeons can learn this technique. As the prevalence of patients requiring these procedures increases, we must be prepared to respond by increasing our training of robotic coronary surgeons.

Endoscopic Robotic Mitral Operating Room as a Microsystem for Safety and Sustainability.

OBJECTIVE: Safety and sustainability are key elements of a robotic mitral valve (MV) program at any stage of development. Challenges include the positioning of the surgeon at the robotic console, increasing patient complexity, and upstream administrative staffing difficulties. We instituted a systems approach to maximize patient safety and maintain robotic service viability. METHODS: A single dedicated robotic operating room (OR) was equipped as a microsystem with team training in the operative steps, ergonomics, digital tools, and an explicit culture of safety. Outcomes of all robotic mitral procedures including concomitant procedures in the microsystem OR by a single surgeon were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: From January 2014 through December 2023, 1,529 consecutive MV patients were operated with an endoscopic robotic approach. Ten patients (0.65%) were converted to conventional approaches. Overall, 1,300 MV repairs (85%) were performed with residual MV regurgitation of none to trace in 1,205 patients (92.7%), mild in 92 patients (7.1%), and moderate in 3 patients (0.23%). MV replacements were performed in 229 patients (15%) with no paravalvular leaks. Mortality was 0.08% in the repair group and 0.87% in the replacement group. No deaths have occurred in the last 38 months. Stroke occurred in 0.31% of repair patients and 1.3% of replacement patients. One patient developed transient renal failure. CONCLUSIONS: Organization of the robotic OR as a microsystem is associated with surgical efficacy and very low morbidity and mortality. A comparable microsystem approach using all or select components may promote safety and sustainability for robotic MV programs at all levels.

Developing Proficiency in Robotic Cardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this review is to provide recommendations for cardiac surgeons interested in adopting a robotic platform into their programs. METHODS: The recommendations are based on the experience of the authors and cover a diverse array of cardiac surgical procedures that are currently performed with robotic assistance. The focus, as with any innovative surgical approach, is to ensure patient safety, maximize quality and efficacy, and set realistic expectations about what is required to achieve proficiency in robotic cardiac surgery. RESULTS: Even though there may be steady growth in robotic cardiac procedures, it is possible that these procedures will be concentrated in higher-volume programs that already offer expertise in mitral valve or coronary surgery. Once success and proficiency with robotic cardiac approaches to coronary or valvular heart disease is achieved, as outlined in this review, surgeons may wish to embark on more complex robotic procedures, such as reoperative mitral valve surgery, totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass, or aortic valve replacement. CONCLUSIONS: Maintaining the same principles and techniques for coronary surgery or intracardiac procedures and maintaining the fundamentals of myocardial protection and cardiopulmonary bypass are essential to ensure excellent technical and clinical outcomes and to optimize patient safety.

Permanent Pacemaker Implantation and Long-Term Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Concomitant Mitral and Tricuspid Valve Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Tricuspid valve annuloplasty (TA) during mitral valve repair (MVr) is associated with increased risk of permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation, but the magnitude of risk and long-term clinical consequences have not been firmly established. OBJECTIVES: This study assesses the incidence rates of PPM implantation after isolated MVr and following MVr with TA as well as the associated long-term clinical consequences of PPM implantation. METHODS: State-mandated hospital discharge databases of New York and California were queried for patients undergoing MVr (isolated or with concomitant TA) between 2004 and 2019. Patients were stratified by whether or not they received a PPM within 90 days of index surgery. After weighting by propensity score, survival, heart failure hospitalizations (HFHs), endocarditis, stroke, and reoperation were compared between patients with or without PPM. RESULTS: A total of 32,736 patients underwent isolated MVr (n = 28,003) or MVr + TA (n = 4,733). Annual MVr + TA volumes increased throughout the study period (P < 0.001, trend), and PPM rates decreased (P < 0.001, trend). The incidence of PPM implantation <90 days after surgery was 7.7% for MVr and 14.0% for MVr + TA. In 90-day conditional landmark-weighted analyses, PPMs were associated with reduced long-term survival among MVr (HR: 1.96; 95% CI: 1.75-2.19; P < 0.001) and MVr + TA recipients (HR: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.28-2.14; P < 0.001). In both surgical groups, PPMs were also associated with an increased risk of HFH (HR: 1.56; 95% CI: 1.27-1.90; P < 0.001) and endocarditis (HR: 1.95; 95% CI: 1.52-2.51; P < 0.001), but not with stroke or reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to isolated MVr, adding TA to MVr was associated with a higher risk of 90-day PPM implantation. In both surgical groups, PPM implantation was associated with an increase in mortality, HFH, and endocarditis.

Atrial fibrillation symptom reduction and improved quality of life following the hybrid convergent procedure: a CONVERGE trial subanalysis.

Background: CONVERGE was a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial that evaluated the safety of Hybrid Atrial Fibrillation Convergent (HC) and compared its effectiveness to endocardial catheter ablation (CA) for the treatment of persistent atrial fibrillation (PersAF) and longstanding PersAF (LSPAF). In 2020, we reported that CONVERGE met its primary safety and effectiveness endpoints. The primary objective of the present study is to report CONVERGE trial results for quality of life (QOL) and Class I/III anti-arrhythmic drug (AAD) utilization following HC. Methods: Eligible patients had drug-refractory symptomatic PersAF or LSPAF and a left atrium diameter ≤6.0 cm. Enrolled patients were randomized 2:1 to receive HC or CA. Atrial Fibrillation Severity Scale (AFSS) and the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) were assessed at baseline and 12 months; statistical comparison was performed using paired t-tests. AAD utilization at baseline through 12 and 18 months post-procedure was evaluated; statistical comparison was performed using McNemar's tests. Results: A total of 153 patients were treated with either HC (n=102) or CA (n=51). Of the 102 HC patients, 38 had LSPAF. AFSS and SF-36 Mental and Physical Component scores were significantly improved at 12 months versus baseline with HC overall and for the subset of LSPAF patients treated with either HC or CA. The proportion of HC patients (n=102) who used Class I /III AADs at 12 and 18 months was significantly less (33.3% and 36.3%, respectively) than baseline (84.3%; P<0.001). In LSPAF patients who underwent HC (n=38), AADs use was 29.0% through 18 months follow-up versus 71.1% at baseline (P<0.001). Conclusions: HC reduced AF symptoms, significantly improved QOL, and reduced AAD use in patients with PersAF and LSPAF. ClinicalTrialsgov Identifier: NCT01984346.

Postoperative warfarin following mitral valve repair or bioprosthetic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Short-term postoperative warfarin therapy has been used to decrease neurologic events following mitral valve repair or bioprosthetic replacement (MVR). The study aim was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing mitral valve surgery with or without short-term postoperative warfarin. METHODS: A single academic US institution retrospective review was performed on discharged patients who underwent MVR between January 1996 and March 2010. Patients were allocated to two groups: MVR with four to six weeks of postoperative warfarin (n = 315; Warfarin group) or MVR without postoperative warfarin (n = 257; No warfarin group). Patients who required either preoperative or postoperative warfarin for any disease process (e.g., atrial fibrillation, mechanical valve, deep venous thrombosis) were excluded. Logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression models were constructed to evaluate the effects of warfarin on short- and long-term outcomes, respectively. Adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and adjusted hazard ratios (AHR), with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were constructed for each outcome. To reduce selection bias, propensity scoring methods were employed to balance the groups with respect to 54 preoperative variables. RESULTS: Mean age was not significantly different between groups (No warfarin group = 56.8 +/- 14.5 years versus Warfarin group 55.9 +/- 12.9 years; p = 0.46). The average length of hospital stay was 9.8 +/- 8.4 days and 7.3 +/- 4.5 days in the No warfarin and Warfarin groups, respectively (p < 0.001). At the six-week follow up the incidences of stroke (p = 0.74), pleural effusions (p = 0.88), pericardial effusions (p = 0.75), and bleeding complications (p = 0.30) were similar between the two groups. In an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier analysis, the No warfarin group had a poorer long-term survival than the Warfarin group (p < 0.001). However, after propensity adjustment, the benefit of warfarin was not statistically significant (AHR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.40-1.08, p = 0.098). CONCLUSION: The use of postoperative warfarin following MVR does not reduce the incidence of stroke at early follow up. However, there remains a trend for improved long-term outcomes in those patients receiving postoperative warfarin therapy.

Transthoracic Aortic Clamp Technique for Port-Only Endoscopic Robotic Mitral Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Many robotic mitral surgeons utilize right thoracotomy with transthoracic clamping of the aorta, while a smaller number employ a port-only endoscopic approach with endoaortic balloon occlusion of the aorta. We present our technique for a port-only endoscopic robotic approach with transthoracic clamping. METHODS: From July 2019 through December 2022, 133 patients underwent port-only endoscopic robotic mitral surgery with transthoracic clamp aortic occlusion and antegrade cardioplegia. Perfusion was through the femoral artery in 101 patients (76%) and axillary in 32 patients (24%). Clamp technique involved placing the clamp at the mid-ascending aorta, dynamic valve testing to 90 mm aortic root pressure, and closure of the cardioplegia cannula site prior to clamp removal. Indications for clamp utilization over balloon occlusion included both balloon supply issues and aortoiliac anatomy. RESULTS: Mitral repair was performed in 122 patients (92.7%) and mitral valve replacement in 11 patients (8.3%). Mean aortic occlusion time was 92 ± 21.4 min. Mean time from left atrial closure to clamp removal was 8.7 (7.2 to 12.8) min. There were no injuries to the aorta or surrounding structures, mortality, strokes, or renal failure. CONCLUSIONS: For robotic teams with endoaortic balloon capability, this technique may be useful in certain patients with aorto-iliac pathology or limited femoral artery access. Alternatively, robotic teams who employ transthoracic aortic clamping through a thoracotomy may find this technique useful to transition to a port-only endoscopic approach.