[Repair of Posterior Mitral Valve Prolapsed: Comparative Study of Three Different Approaches].
Lai Wei,Jin-qiang Shen,Chun-sheng Wang,Li-min Xia,Zhao-hua Yang,Huan Liu,Jia-si Zhu,Hong Luo,Ke-fang Guo,Ke-jian Hu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-5815.2012.07.017
2012-01-01
Abstract:OBJECTIVE:To compared outcomes of robotic mitral valve repair with those of standard sternotomy, and right anterolateral thoracotomy.METHOD:From August 2010 to July 2011, 70 patients with degenerative mitral valve disease and posterior leaflet prolapsed scheduled for elective isolated mitral valve repair were prospectively nonrandomized to undergo mitral valve operation by standard sternotomy (n = 30), right anterolateral thoracotomy (n = 30), or a robotic approach (n = 10). There were 49 male and 21 female patients, aging from 16 to 70 years with a mean of 53.4 years. Outcomes of the three groups were compared.RESULTS:Mitral valve repair was achieved in all patients except 1 patient in the standard group. There were no in-hospital deaths. The median operation time [(300 ± 41) min, (184 ± 20) min and (169 ± 22) min, F = 112.5, P < 0.01], cardiopulmonary bypass time [(139 ± 26) min, (82 ± 20) min and (69 ± 23) min, F = 36.8, P < 0.01], aortic cross-clamping time [(93 ± 23) min, (47 ± 10) min and (38 ± 8) min, F = 75.0, P < 0.01] were longer for robotic than standard sternotomy and right anterolateral thoracotomy. The robotic group had shortest time of mechanical ventilation time [(4.9 ± 2.1) h, (5.3 ± 4.5) h and (14.1 ± 10.2) h, F = 13.2, P < 0.01], ICU time [(15.1 ± 2.1) h, (16.4 ± 5.4) h and (28.7 ± 16.1) h, F = 11.6, P < 0.01], postoperative hospital stay time [(4.6 ± 1.0) d, (5.7 ± 1.7) d and (8.8 ± 5.1) d, F = 8.0, P < 0.01] with the lowest of drainage [(192 ± 200) ml, (215 ± 163) ml and (405 ± 239) ml, F = 7.1, P < 0.01] and ratio of the patients needed blood transfusion (0, 20.0% and 66.7%, χ(2) = 22.7, P < 0.01). Patients were followed up 6 to 17 months, with 100% completed. No patients died during follow-ups, and no moderate or more mitral regurgitation was observed. The robotic group had the shortest time of return to normal activities compared with the other two groups [(2.4 ± 0.7) weeks, (4.2 ± 1.2) weeks and (8.2 ± 1.8) weeks, F = 83.0, P < 0.01].CONCLUSION:This study shows mitral valve repair via the right anterolateral thoracotomy and a robotic approach is safe and feasible, with good cosmetic results and rapid postoperative recovery, and is worthy of clinical selective application.