Minithoracotomy versus full sternotomy for isolated aortic valve replacement: Propensity matched data from two centers. Issue 1 (1st November 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Meyer, Alexander; van Kampen, Antonia; Kiefer, Philipp; Sündermann, Simon; Van Praet, Karel M.; Borger, Michael A.; Falk, Volkmar; Kempfert, Jörg
• Is Part Of: Journal of cardiac surgery. Volume 36:Issue 1(2021)
• Page Start: 97
• Page End: 104
• Publication Date: 2020-11-01
• Subjects: aortic valve replacement -- minimally invasive aortic valve replacement -- minimally invasive valve surgery -- propensity score -- right anterolateral thoracotomy -- valve surgery; Heart -- Surgery -- Periodicals; 617.412005
• DOI: 10.1111/jocs.15177
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0886-0440

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Minimally invasive approaches to isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR) continue to gain popularity. This study compares outcomes of AVR through right anterolateral thoracotomy (RALT) to those of AVR through full median sternotomy (MS). Methods: Outcomes of two propensity‐matched groups of 85 each, out of 250 patients that underwent isolated AVR through RALT or MS at our two institutions, were compared in a retrospective study. Results: Propensity score matching resulted in 85 matched pairs with balanced preoperative characteristics. Procedure times were significantly shorter in the RALT group (median difference: 13 min [−25 to −0.5]; p = .039), cardiopulmonary bypass times were longer (median difference: 17 min [10–23.5]; p = < .001) and ventilation times shorter (median difference: 259 min [−390 to −122.5]; p = < .001). There was no significant difference in aortic cross‐clamp times (median difference: 1.5 min [−3.5 to 6.5]; p = .573). The RALT group had lower rates of perioperative platelet transfusions (odds ratio [OR] = 0.00 [0.00–0.59]; p = .0078) and postoperative pneumonia (OR = 0.10 [0.00–0.70]; p = .012), as well as shorter hospitalization times (median difference: 2.5 days [−4.5 to −1]; p = .005). There were no significant differences regarding paravalvular leakage ( p = .25), postoperative stroke ( p = 1), postoperative atrial fibrillation ( p = .12) or 1‐year‐mortality ( p = 1). Conclusions: This study found RALT to be an equally safe approach to surgical AVR as MS. Furthermore, RALT showed advantages regarding important aspects of postoperative recovery, especially concerning pulmonary function.