Comparison of robotic and conventional sternotomy in redo mitral valve surgery.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Redo operation for mitral valve surgery carries higher risks than first time cardiac surgery. The adhesion between sternum and heart, and also the complexity of second time operation make the redo operation more difficult. The robotic surgery carries some benefit in terms of magnification, assisted by the scope view and precise movement of the instruments. We compared the results of our robotic redo mitral valve surgeries with those of conventional re-sternotomy. METHODS: Medical records of patients who underwent redo mitral valve surgeries between 2012 and 2019 at our hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Demographic data, patients' medical histories, presenting symptoms, image analyses, echocardiogram data, operative procedures and postoperative clinical outcomes were collected through chart review. RESULTS: A total of 67 redo mitral valve surgeries, including 23 robotic and 44 re-sternotomy procedures were performed. There were no differences in age, previous operation times, and intervals to previous surgery. Comorbidities of both groups were similar. There was no surgical mortality in the robotic group, and it was 9.0% in the re-sternotomy group (p = 0.287). Operation time was shorter in the robotic group (176 vs. 321 min; robotic vs. re-sternotomy, p＝0.0279). Blood transfusion was lower in the robotic group (1 vs. 2 units; robotic vs. re-sternotomy, p = 0.01189). The ventilation time, ICU stay time, and recheck bleeding rate were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: In select patients, robotic redo mitral valve surgery is safe and feasible. It could offer low operative mortality. It is associated with shorter operative times, than re-sternotomy and provides equal immediate operative results.