ABSTRACT
Objective To compare the surgical outcome and long-term follow-up after mitral valve replacement through either minimally invasive(MI) or traditional median stemotomy(ST) surgery.Methods All 1 096 patients who received either MI or ST mitral valve replacement surgery,between January 1,2012 and July 30,2015 were analyzed for outcome differences due to surgical approach using propensity score matching(MI group n =405,ST group n =691).Find out the best matched with the 202 cases of the two groups.The clinical data of patients were collected including operativedata,postoperativecomplications,and follow-up.Results MI Group was longer in CPB time [(145.97 ±34.65)min vs.(92.24 ±25.58)min,(P ＜ 0.001)],aortic clamping time [(93.89 ± 25.25) min vs.(56.42 ± 18.09) min,(P ＜ 0.001)],and operating time[(237.49 ± 47.48) min vs.(217.31 ± 55.95) min,(P ＜ 0.001)].The MI group was associated with more less in transfusion(24.26％ vs 33.66％ P=0.037),mechanical ventilation[(15.29 ±11.45)h vs.(21.34 ±40.36)h,(P=0.041)],ICU stay[(44.12 ±39.51)h vs.(61.15 ± 106.01) h,(P =0.033)],volume of thoracic drainag[(404.11 ±485.84)ml vs.(674.82 ±585.37)ml,(P＜0.001)],postoperative drainage time[(2.59 ±1.75)d vs.(4.25 ±1.91)d,(P ＜0.001)],hospital stay [(5.64 ± 3.07) d vs.(1 1.44 ± 6.71) d,(P ＜ 0.001)].There were no significant difference in the complications of follow-up(P ＞ 0.05).SF-36 score had no significant difference either(P ＞ 0.05).Conclusion The minimally invasive thoracoseopic has longer in CBP time and cross-clamp time,;but it didnot increase the risk of mortality and complications.What's more,havingless trauma,fewer transfusions,lcss wound infection,faster rccovcry,and high satisfaction with the incision in long-term follow up and other advantages.Minimally invasive thoracoscopic cardiac surgery is safe,effective and feasible.
ABSTRACT
Objective To compare the surgical outcome and long-term follow-up after mitral valve replacement through either minimally invasive(MI) or traditional median stemotomy(ST) surgery.Methods All 1 096 patients who received either MI or ST mitral valve replacement surgery,between January 1,2012 and July 30,2015 were analyzed for outcome differences due to surgical approach using propensity score matching(MI group n =405,ST group n =691).Find out the best matched with the 202 cases of the two groups.The clinical data of patients were collected including operativedata,postoperativecomplications,and follow-up.Results MI Group was longer in CPB time [(145.97 ±34.65)min vs.(92.24 ±25.58)min,(P ＜ 0.001)],aortic clamping time [(93.89 ± 25.25) min vs.(56.42 ± 18.09) min,(P ＜ 0.001)],and operating time[(237.49 ± 47.48) min vs.(217.31 ± 55.95) min,(P ＜ 0.001)].The MI group was associated with more less in transfusion(24.26％ vs 33.66％ P=0.037),mechanical ventilation[(15.29 ±11.45)h vs.(21.34 ±40.36)h,(P=0.041)],ICU stay[(44.12 ±39.51)h vs.(61.15 ± 106.01) h,(P =0.033)],volume of thoracic drainag[(404.11 ±485.84)ml vs.(674.82 ±585.37)ml,(P＜0.001)],postoperative drainage time[(2.59 ±1.75)d vs.(4.25 ±1.91)d,(P ＜0.001)],hospital stay [(5.64 ± 3.07) d vs.(1 1.44 ± 6.71) d,(P ＜ 0.001)].There were no significant difference in the complications of follow-up(P ＞ 0.05).SF-36 score had no significant difference either(P ＞ 0.05).Conclusion The minimally invasive thoracoseopic has longer in CBP time and cross-clamp time,;but it didnot increase the risk of mortality and complications.What's more,havingless trauma,fewer transfusions,lcss wound infection,faster rccovcry,and high satisfaction with the incision in long-term follow up and other advantages.Minimally invasive thoracoscopic cardiac surgery is safe,effective and feasible.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE@#To compare the clinical outcomes of minimally invasive right subaxillary vertical thoracotomy and traditional median sternotomy through right atrium in treatment of common congenital heart diseases.@*METHODS@#Clinical data of 59 cases of common congenital heart diseases treated with minimally invasive right axillary vertical thoracotomy from May, 2011 to February, 2013 and 77 cases of same diseases with traditional median sternotomy in the past three years were retrospectively analyzed, including atrial septal defect, membranous ventricular septal defect and partial endocardial cushion defect. The results were compared from the two groups, including the time for operation and cardiopulmonary bypass, amount of blood transfusion, postoperative drainage, ventilation time, hospital stay, and prognosis.@*RESULTS@#No severe complications happened in both groups, like deaths or secondary surgery caused by bleeding. No significant differences were in CPB time and postoperative ventilator time between groups (P>0.05), while for all of the operative time, the length of incision, postoperative drainage and hospital stay, minimally invasive right axillary vertical thoracotomy was superior to median sternotomy, with statistically significant differences (P<0.05). In six-month followup after operation, no complications of residual deformity and pericardial effusion were found in both groups by doing echocardiography, but mild pectus carinatum was found in 8 patients in the traditional median sternotomy group (traditional group), whereas patients in another group were well recovered.@*CONCLUSIONS@#Minimally invasive right subaxillary vertical thoracotomy for common congenital heart diseases is as safe as traditional median sternotomy, without the increasing incidence of postoperative complications. Additionally, compared with traditional median sternotomy, minimally invasive right subaxillary vertical thoracotomy is better in the aspects of hidden incision, appearance, and postoperative recovery.