+1 Recommend
0 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery: A Systematic Review

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          In the recent years minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) has become a well-established and increasingly used option for managing patients with a mitral valve pathology. Nonetheless, whether the purported benefits of MIMVS translate into clinically important outcomes remains controversial. Therefore, in this paper we provide an overview of MIMVS and discuss results, morbidity, mortality, and quality of life following mitral minimally invasive procedures. MIMVS has been proven to be a feasible alternative to the conventional full sternotomy approach with low perioperative morbidity and short-term mortality. Reported benefits of MIMVS include also decreased postoperative pain, improved postoperative respiratory function, reduced surgical trauma, and greater patient satisfaction. Finally, compared to standard surgery, MIMVS demonstrated comparable efficacy across a range of long-term efficacy measures such as freedom from reoperation and long-term survival.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 98

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Minimally invasive cardiac valve surgery improves patient satisfaction while reducing costs of cardiac valve replacement and repair.

          This study compares the quality of valve replacement and repair performed through minimally invasive incisions as compared to the standard operation for aortic and mitral valve replacement. With the advent of minimally invasive laparoscopic approaches to orthopedic surgery, urology, general surgery, and thoracic surgery, it now is apparent that standard cardiac valve operations can be performed through very small incisions with similar approaches. Eighty-four patients underwent minimally invasive aortic (n = 41) and minimally invasive mitral valve repair and replacement (n = 43) between July 1996 and April 1997. Demographics, procedures, operative techniques, and postoperative morbidity and mortality were calculated, and a subset of the first 50 patients was compared to a 50-patient cohort who underwent the same operation through a conventional median sternotomy. Demographics, postoperative morbidity and mortality, patient satisfaction, and charges were compared. Of the 84 patients, there were 2 operative mortalities both in class IV aortic patients from multisystem organ failure. There was no operative mortality in the patients undergoing mitral valve replacement or repair. The operations were carried out with the same accuracy and attention to detail as with the conventional operation. There was minimal postoperative bleeding, cerebral vascular accidents, or other major morbidity. Groin cannulation complications primarily were related to atherosclerotic femoral arteries. A comparison of the minimally invasive to the conventional group, although operative time and ischemia time was higher in minimally invasive group, the requirement for erythrocytes was significantly less, patient satisfaction was significantly greater, and charges were approximately 20% less than those in the conventional group. Minimally invasive aortic and mitral valve surgery in patients without coronary disease can be done safely and accurately through small incisions. Patient satisfaction is up, return to normality is higher, and requirement for postrehabilitation services is less. In addition, the charges are approximately 20% less. These results serve as a paradigm for the future in terms of valve surgery in the managed care environment.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

            The mitral valve has been traditionally approached through a median sternotomy. However, significant advances in surgical optics, instrumentation, tissue telemanipulation, and perfusion technology have allowed for mitral valve surgery to be performed using progressively smaller incisions including the minithoracotomy and hemisternotomy. Due to reports of excellent results, minimally invasive mitral valve surgery has become a standard of care at certain specialized centers worldwide. This meta-analysis quantifies the effects of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery on morbidity and mortality compared with conventional mitral surgery and demonstrates equivalent perioperative mortality (1641 patients, odds ratio (OR) 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.15-1.42, p=0.18), reduced need for reoperation for bleeding (1553 patients, OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.35-0.90, p=0.02) and a trend towards shorter hospital stays (350 patients, weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.73, 95% CI -1.52 to 0.05, p=0.07). These benefits were evident despite longer cardiopulmonary bypass (WMD 25.81, 95% CI 13.13-38.50, p<0.0001) and cross-clamp times (WMD 20.91, 95% CI 8.79-33.04, p=0.0007) in the minimally invasive group. Case-control studies show consistently less pain and faster recovery compared to those having a conventional approach. Data for minimally invasive mitral valve surgery after previous cardiac surgery are limited but consistently demonstrate reduced blood loss, fewer transfusions and faster recovery compared to reoperative sternotomy. Long-term follow-up data from multiple cohort studies are also examined revealing equivalent survival and freedom from reoperation. Thus, current clinical data suggest that minimally invasive mitral valve surgery is a safe and a durable alternative to a conventional approach and is associated with less morbidity.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              J. Maxwell Chamberlain Memorial Paper for adult cardiac surgery. Less-invasive mitral valve operations: trends and outcomes from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database.

              The purpose of this study was to examine utilization and outcomes of less-invasive mitral valve (LIMV) operations in North America. Between 2004 and 2008, 28,143 patients undergoing isolated mitral valve (MV) operations were identified in The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgical Database (STS ACSD). The LIMV operations were defined as those performed with femoral arterial and venous cannulation. The LIMV operations increased from 11.9% of MV operations in 2004 to 20.1% in 2008 (p < 0.0001). In 2008, 26% of STS ACSD centers performed at least one LIMV operation, with a median of 3 per year. Patients in the LIMV group were younger and had fewer comorbidities. Median perfusion (135 versus 108 minutes) and cross-clamp times (100 versus 80 minutes, p < 0.0001) were longer in the LIMV group. Mitral valve repair rates were higher in the LIMV group (85% versus 67%, p < 0.0001). Adjusted operative mortality was similar (odds ratio 1.13, 95% confidence interval: 0.84 to 1.51, p = 0.47). Blood transfusion was less common (odds ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval: 0.76 to 0.97, p < 0.0001) while stroke was more common (OR 1.96, 95% confidence interval: 1.46 to 2.63, p < 0.0001) in the LIMV group. In selected patients, LIMV operations can be performed with equivalent operative mortality, shorter hospital stay, fewer blood transfusions, and higher rates of MV repair than conventional sternotomy. However, perfusion and cross-clamp times were longer, and the risk of stroke was significantly higher. Beating- or fibrillating-heart LIMV techniques are associated with particularly high risks for perioperative stroke. Copyright © 2010 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

                Author and article information

                Minim Invasive Surg
                Minim Invasive Surg
                Minimally Invasive Surgery
                Hindawi Publishing Corporation
                27 March 2013
                : 2013
                1Cardiothoracic and Cardiology Department, Maastricht University, The Netherlands
                2Heart and Vessels Department, Careggi Hospital, Florence, Italy
                3Cardiology Department, Paolo Borsellino Hospital, Marsala, Italy
                Author notes

                Academic Editor: Gideon Uretzky

                Copyright © 2013 Fabiana Lucà et al.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                Review Article



                Comment on this article