Robotic Mitral Valve Repair: The Learning Curve. Issue 6 (November 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Goodman, Avi; Koprivanac, Marijan; Kelava, Marta; Mick, Stephanie L.; Gillinov, A. Marc; Rajeswaran, Jeevanantham; Brzezinski, Anna; Blackstone, Eugene H.; Mihaljevic, Tomislav
• Is Part Of: Innovations. Volume 12:Issue 6(2017)
• Page Start: 390
• Page End: 397
• Publication Date: 2017-11
• Subjects: Robotic cardiac surgery -- Outcomes -- Mitral valve repair -- Minimally invasive surgery -- Learning curve; Cardiovascular system -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Heart -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Blood-vessels -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Chest -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Thoracic Surgical Procedures -- methods -- Periodicals; Vascular Surgical Procedures -- methods -- Periodicals; Thorax -- Chirurgie -- Méthodologie -- Périodiques; Vaisseaux sanguins -- Chirurgie -- Méthodologie -- Périodiques; Blood-vessels -- Surgery; Chest -- Surgery; Periodicals; 617.41
• DOI: 10.1177/155698451701200604
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1556-9845

Abstract

Objective: Adoption of robotic mitral valve surgery has been slow, likely in part because of its perceived technical complexity and a poorly understood learning curve. We sought to correlate changes in technical performance and outcome with surgeon experience in the "learning curve" part of our series. Methods: From 2006 to 2011, two surgeons undertook robotically assisted mitral valve repair in 458 patients (intent-to-treat); 404 procedures were completed entirely robotically (as-treated). Learning curves were constructed by modeling surgical sequence number semiparametrically with flexible penalized spline smoothing best-fit curves. Results: Operative efficiency, reflecting technical performance, improved for (1) operating room time for case 1 to cases 200 (early experience) and 400 (later experience), from 414 to 364 to 321 minutes (12% and 22% decrease, respectively), (2) cardiopulmonary bypass time, from 148 to 102 to 91 minutes (31% and 39% decrease), and (3) myocardial ischemic time, from 119 to 75 to 68 minutes (37% and 43% decrease). Composite postoperative complications, reflecting safety, decreased from 17% to 6% to 2% (63% and 85% decrease). Intensive care unit stay decreased from 32 to 28 to 24 hours (13% and 25% decrease). Postoperative stay fell from 5.2 to 4.5 to 3.8 days (13% and 27% decrease). There were no in-hospital deaths. Predischarge mitral regurgitation of less than 2+, reflecting effectiveness, was achieved in 395 (97.8%), without correlation to experience; return-to-work times did not change substantially with experience. Conclusions: Technical efficiency of robotic mitral valve repair improves with experience and permits its safe and effective conduct.