Commentary: Robotic mitral repair: The "new gold-standard" that requires more gold
Song Wan,Qiang Zhao,Chun-Sheng Wang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2022.05.035
2024-01-01
Abstract:Central MessageRobotic mitral repair is costly, and yet not for every patient or every surgeon. This “new gold-standard” is to be compared with its engaging competitor—the endoscopic minithoracotomy approach.See Article page XXX. Robotic mitral repair is costly, and yet not for every patient or every surgeon. This “new gold-standard” is to be compared with its engaging competitor—the endoscopic minithoracotomy approach. See Article page XXX. The past 2 decades have witnessed gradual worldwide adoption of robot-assisted surgery using da Vinci surgical systems (Intuitive Surgical). According to the statistics posted on the company's website, 6730 da Vinci surgical systems had been installed as of the end of 2021, including 4139 in the United States, 1199 in Europe, and 1050 in Asia. Compared with surgeons in several other subspecialties, cardiac surgeons have not been among the most frequent users of robotic technology to date. With the exception of harvesting the internal mammary artery, for instance, the advantages of using robotic systems for surgical coronary revascularization remain uncertain.1Damiano Jr., R.J. Robotics in cardiac surgery: the emperor’s new clothes.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2007; 134: 559-561Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (28) Google Scholar,2Cerny S. Oosterlinck W. Onan B. Singh S. Segers P. Bolcal C. et al.Robotic cardiac surgery in Europe: status 2020.Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022; 8: 827515https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2021.827515Crossref PubMed Scopus (1) Google Scholar In contrast, robot-assisted mitral valve repair has shown remarkable early and midterm results when performed by expert surgeons at centers of excellence for valve surgery,2Cerny S. Oosterlinck W. Onan B. Singh S. Segers P. Bolcal C. et al.Robotic cardiac surgery in Europe: status 2020.Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022; 8: 827515https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2021.827515Crossref PubMed Scopus (1) Google Scholar, 3Suri R.M. Taggarse A. Burkhart H.M. Daly R.C. Mauermann W. Nishimura R.A. et al.Robotic mitral valve repair for simple and complex degenerative disease: midterm clinical and echocardiographic quality outcomes.Circulation. 2015; 132: 1961-1968Crossref PubMed Scopus (64) Google Scholar, 4Murphy D.A. Moss E. Binongo J. Miller J.S. Macheers S.K. Sarin E.L. et al.The expanding role of endoscopic robotics in mitral valve surgery: 1,257 consecutive procedures.Ann Thorac Surg. 2015; 100 (discussion: 1681-2): 1675-1681Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (86) Google Scholar, 5Chitwood Jr., W.R. Robotic mitral valve surgery: overview, methodology, results, and perspective.Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2016; 5: 544-555Crossref PubMed Scopus (32) Google Scholar including the Cedars-Sinai group.6Roach A. Trento A. Emerson D. Gill G. Rowe G. Peiris A. et al.Durable robotic mitral repair of degenerative primary regurgitation with long-term follow-up.Ann Thorac Surg. August 23, 2021; ([Epub ahead of print])https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2021.07.060Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF Scopus (2) Google Scholar In this issue of The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Rowe and colleagues7Rowe G. Gill G. Trento A. Emerson D. Roach A. Peiris A. et al.Robotic repair for Barlow’s mitral regurgitation: repairability, safety and durability.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2022; XX: xxGoogle Scholar from this group provided another important piece of evidence supporting the use of robotic technology in complex mitral valve repair. With a repair rate of 99% and a 5-year freedom from greater than moderate mitral regurgitation rate of 92%, their 16-year experience of robotic mitral repair in 110 patients with Barlow's disease is simply outstanding. Combined with other institutional reports cited in the article by Rowe and colleagues,7Rowe G. Gill G. Trento A. Emerson D. Roach A. Peiris A. et al.Robotic repair for Barlow’s mitral regurgitation: repairability, safety and durability.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2022; XX: xxGoogle Scholar few would disagree with Dr Marc Gillinov's remark at a recent American Association for Thoracic Surgery Global Grand Rounds Webinar, stating that the robotic approach represents the “new gold-standard” for mitral valve repair. Nonetheless, in the field of cardiovascular surgery, most people consider that the gold-standard should be routinely applied to every patient by every surgeon, such as grafting internal mammary artery onto the left anterior descending coronary artery during surgical myocardial revascularization, or performing mitral valve repair for degenerative mitral regurgitation. Interestingly, the debate regarding the gold-standard approach for mitral valve repair is not new.8David T.E. Mitral valve repair: is the cheese factory moving?.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016; 151: 1455-1456Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (6) Google Scholar The traditional gold-standard is repair under direct vision via midline sternotomy, which is still the predominant method used worldwide. It is believed by many “mitral surgeons,” if not all, that without a multicenter, prospective, randomized clinical trial comparing the robotic with the conventional sternotomy approaches, “the cheese is not going to move.”8David T.E. Mitral valve repair: is the cheese factory moving?.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016; 151: 1455-1456Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (6) Google Scholar Indeed, most published reports on robotic mitral repair have been from Western countries, undertaken in carefully selected patients, and performed by expert mitral surgeons. This explains why the number of centers in the United States that routinely conduct such procedures are still much less than expected, despite 4139 da Vinci surgical systems actually being available in the country. In fact, in total 1037 patients underwent robotic mitral valve surgery from 2005 to 2020 at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center,7Rowe G. Gill G. Trento A. Emerson D. Roach A. Peiris A. et al.Robotic repair for Barlow’s mitral regurgitation: repairability, safety and durability.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2022; XX: xxGoogle Scholar which averages 1.25 cases per week. In 27 European centers over a recent 4-year period (2016-2019), only 626 isolated robotic mitral repair operations were carried out.2Cerny S. Oosterlinck W. Onan B. Singh S. Segers P. Bolcal C. et al.Robotic cardiac surgery in Europe: status 2020.Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022; 8: 827515https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2021.827515Crossref PubMed Scopus (1) Google Scholar These real-world figures did reflect the difficulties involved in establishing this “new gold-standard.” If we consider developing countries, such as China, we might appreciate this “new gold-standard” issue from a different perspective.9Wan S. Mitral valve surgery at the oriental crossroad.Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann. 2020; 28: 357-359Crossref PubMed Scopus (2) Google Scholar To the best of our knowledge, 275 da Vinci surgical systems have been installed in mainland China to date (ie, the numbers in Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan are not included). Among more than 310,000 surgical procedures carried out using these robotic systems between 2007 and 2021, only approximately 3400 (1.1%) were cardiac surgeries, of which more than 900 were mitral valve procedures (personal communication, Intuitive Fosun). Focusing on the more recent annual number of cardiovascular surgeries performed in mainland China, however, a sharp increasing trend in the use of endoscopic mitral valve surgery via minithoracotomy was evident between 2018 and 2020 (Table 1). Moreover, the number of endoscopic mitral procedures continued to increase despite the negative influence of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, whereas the overall number of valvular operations was greatly reduced (Table 1). It is clear that the number of endoscopic minithoracotomy mitral valve procedures (approximately half of them were mitral repair) in China was significantly greater than the number of mitral valve operations performed using the robotic approach.Table 1Annual volume of cardiovascular surgery in mainland China (2018-2020)YearTotal casesCPB casesValve casesMinimitral casesMinimitral repair cases2018240,614170,44468,8822900Unknown2019253,867175,55773,56138091889 (49.6%)2020222,413150,13265,82242602049 (48.1%)CPB, Cardiopulmonary bypass; minimitral, minithoracotomy endoscopic mitral operation; minimitral repair, minithoracotomy endoscopic mitral repair operation. Open table in a new tab CPB, Cardiopulmonary bypass; minimitral, minithoracotomy endoscopic mitral operation; minimitral repair, minithoracotomy endoscopic mitral repair operation. Obviously, by avoiding sternotomy, the 2 minimally invasive approaches share many similarities in their clinical outcomes, such as quicker recovery (shorter hospital stay) and better cosmesis (improved patient satisfaction).10Lange R. Voss B. Kehl V. Mazzitelli D. Tassani-Prell P. Günther T. Right minithoracotomy versus full sternotomy for mitral valve repair: a propensity matched comparison.Ann Thorac Surg. 2016; 103: 573-579Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (34) Google Scholar,11Downs E.A. Johnston L.E. LaPar D.J. Ghanta R.K. Kron I.L. Speir A.M. et al.Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery provides excellent outcomes without increased cost: a multi-institutional analysis.Ann Thorac Surg. 2016; 102: 14-21Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (37) Google Scholar One major difference among them, however, is the significantly higher cost of robotic mitral valve surgery.11Downs E.A. Johnston L.E. LaPar D.J. Ghanta R.K. Kron I.L. Speir A.M. et al.Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery provides excellent outcomes without increased cost: a multi-institutional analysis.Ann Thorac Surg. 2016; 102: 14-21Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (37) Google Scholar,12Hassan M. Miao Y. Lincoln J. Ricci M. Cost-benefit analysis of robotic versus nonrobotic minimally invasive mitral valve surgery.Innovations. 2015; 10: 90-95Crossref PubMed Google Scholar The cost includes not only the “measurable” purchasing cost of the robotic system and the additional maintenance and surgical disposable costs, but also the “invisible” costs, such as that of the steady learning curve of the entire robotic surgery team. In fact, it is generally estimated that at least 100 to 150 cases are needed before the surgical team can overcome the “time-consuming phase” of robotic mitral valve surgery. In an attempt to convincingly confirm the “new gold-standard” approach for mitral valve repair, should we continue to compare the cost-effectiveness of the 2 minimally invasive approaches by conducting another multicenter randomized clinical trial? It is a difficult question that will likely remain unanswered for years. However, most of us probably know the final answer already—the cheese will be moved, eventually. Robotic repair for Barlow mitral regurgitation: Repairability, safety, and durabilityThe Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular SurgeryPreviewIn Barlow disease, increased repair complexity drives decreased repair rates. We evaluated outcomes of a simplified approach to robotic mitral repair in Barlow disease. Full-Text PDF