Submitted:
12 April 2024
Posted:
15 April 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Population
2.2. Study Groups
2.3. Preoperative Diagnostic Tools
2.4. Indication For Surgery
2.5. Surgical Procedure
2.5.1. Supracoronary Replacement of the Ascending Aorta
2.5.2. Wheat-Procedure (Video Included as Supplementary Material)
2.5.3. Bentall-Procedure
2.6. Postoperative Care
2.7. Follow-up Data
2.8. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
6. Limitation
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Seeburger, J.; et al., Minimal invasive mitral valve repair for mitral regurgitation: Results of 1339 consecutive patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, 2008. 34(4): p. 760-5. [CrossRef]
- Svensson, L.G.; et al., Minimally invasive versus conventional mitral valve surgery: A propensity-matched comparison. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2010. 139(4): p. 926-32 e1-2. [CrossRef]
- Akowuah, E.F.; et al., Minithoracotomy vs Conventional Sternotomy for Mitral Valve Repair: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA, 2023. 329(22): p. 1957-1966. [CrossRef]
- Moscarelli, M.; et al., Minimal Access Versus Sternotomy for Complex Mitral Valve Repair: A Meta-Analysis. Ann Thorac Surg, 2020. 109(3): p. 737-744. [CrossRef]
- Sakaguchi, T.; et al., Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Repair Through Right Minithoracotomy - 11-Year Single Institute Experience. Circ J, 2018. 82(6): p. 1705-1711. [CrossRef]
- Berretta, P.; et al., Minimally invasive approach: Is this the future of aortic surgery? Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2022. 38(Suppl 1): p. 171-182. [CrossRef]
- Bakhtiary, F.; et al., Comparison of Right Anterior Mini-Thoracotomy Versus Partial Upper Sternotomy in Aortic Valve Replacement. Adv Ther, 2022. 39(9): p. 4266-4284. [CrossRef]
- El-Sayed Ahmad, A.; et al., The First 100 Cases of Two Innovations Combined: Video-Assisted Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement Through Right Anterior Mini-Thoracotomy Using a Novel Aortic Prosthesis. Adv Ther, 2021. 38(5): p. 2435-2446. [CrossRef]
- Seitz, M.; et al., Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement Via Right Anterior Mini-Thoracotomy: Propensity Matched Initial Experience. Heart Lung Circ, 2019. 28(2): p. 320-326. [CrossRef]
- Malaisrie, S.C.; et al., Current era minimally invasive aortic valve replacement: Techniques and practice. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2014. 147(1): p. 6-14. [CrossRef]
- Bowdish, M.E.; et al., A comparison of aortic valve replacement via an anterior right minithoracotomy with standard sternotomy: A propensity score analysis of 492 patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, 2016. 49(2): p. 456-63. [CrossRef]
- Fatehi Hassanabad, A.; et al., Right anterior mini thoracotomy approach for isolated aortic valve replacement: Early outcomes at a Canadian center. J Card Surg, 2021. 36(7): p. 2365-2372. [CrossRef]
- Sioris, T.; et al., Clinical outcomes after separate and composite replacement of the aortic valve and ascending aorta. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2004. 128(2): p. 260-5. [CrossRef]
- Mok, S.C.; et al., Twenty-five year outcomes following composite graft aortic root replacement. J Card Surg, 2017. 32(2): p. 99-109. [CrossRef]
- Haunschild, J.; et al., Supracommissural replacement of the ascending aorta and the aortic valve via partial versus full sternotomy-a propensity-matched comparison in a high-volume centre. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, 2022. 61(2): p. 479-487. [CrossRef]
- Mikus, E.; et al., Mini-Bentall: An Interesting Approach for Selected Patients. Innovations (Phila), 2017. 12(1): p. 41-45. [CrossRef]
- Shah, V.N.; et al., Upper Hemisternotomy Versus Full Sternotomy for Replacement of the Supracoronary Ascending Aorta and Aortic Valve. Innovations (Phila), 2024. 19(1): p. 39-45. [CrossRef]
- Helms, F.; et al., Expanding the Minimally Invasive Approach towards the Ascending Aorta-A Practical Overview of the Currently Available Techniques. Medicina (Kaunas), 2023. 59(9). [CrossRef]
- Shrestha, M.L.; et al., David procedure through an upper partial sternotomy. Ann Cardiothorac Surg, 2015. 4(2): p. 212-3. [CrossRef]
- Perrotta, S. and S. Lentini, Ministernotomy approach for surgery of the aortic root and ascending aorta. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg, 2009. 9(5): p. 849-58. [CrossRef]
- LaPietra, A.; et al., Outcomes of aortic valve and concomitant ascending aorta replacement performed via a minimally invasive right thoracotomy approach. Innovations (Phila), 2014. 9(5): p. 339-42; discussion 342. [CrossRef]
- Johnson, C.A., Jr.; et al., Right Mini-thoracotomy Bentall Procedure. Innovations (Phila), 2018. 13(5): p. 328-331. [CrossRef]
- Johnson, C.A., Jr.; et al., Right mini-thoracotomy Bentall with traditional and automated suturing devices. Multimed Man Cardiothorac Surg, 2018. 2018. [CrossRef]
- Lamelas, J. and A. LaPietra, Right Minithoracotomy Approach for Replacement of the Ascending Aorta, Hemiarch, and Aortic Valve. Innovations (Phila), 2016. 11(4): p. 301-4. [CrossRef]
- Ji, Q.; et al., Mini-Invasive Bentall Procedure Performed via a Right Anterior Thoracotomy Approach With a Costochondral Cartilage Sparing. Front Cardiovasc Med, 2022. 9:p. 841472. [CrossRef]
- Authors/Task Force, M.; et al., EACTS/STS Guidelines for Diagnosing and Treating Acute and Chronic Syndromes of the Aortic Organ. Ann Thorac Surg, 2024. [CrossRef]
- Vahanian, A.; et al., 2021 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J, 2022. 43(7): p. 561-632. [CrossRef]
- Chang, C.; et al., Minimally Invasive Approaches to Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-Analysis. Ann Thorac Surg, 2018. 106(6): p. 1881-1889. [CrossRef]
- Phan, K.; et al., A meta-analysis of minimally invasive versus conventional sternotomy for aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg, 2014. 98(4): p. 1499-511. [CrossRef]
- Omura, A.; et al., Early and late results of graft replacement for dissecting aneurysm of thoracoabdominal aorta in patients with Marfan syndrome. Ann Thorac Surg, 2012. 94(3): p. 759-65. [CrossRef]
- Hamilton, A.; et al., Cost reduction in cardiac surgery. Can J Cardiol, 1994. 10(7): p. 721-7.





| total n=44 |
A n=14 |
B n=30 |
p-Value |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline data | ||||
| Age | 61.4 ± 10.7 | 5.60 ± 12.3 | 63.1 ± 9.6 | 0.086 |
| Male gender | 28 (63.6%) | 8 (57.1%) | 20 (66.7%) | 0.541 |
| BMI | 26.3 ± 3.9 | 26.7 ± 2.8 | 26.1 ± 4.3 | 0.296 |
| Aortic valve pathology | ||||
| Aortic regurgitation | 14 (31.8%) | 0 (0.0%) | 14 (46.7%) | <0.001 |
| Aortic stenosis | 16 (36.4%) | 0 (0.0%) | 16 (53.3%) | <0.001 |
| Bicuspid aortic valve | 21 (47.7%) | 5 (35.7%) | 16 (53.3%) | 0.276 |
| Previous medical history | ||||
| Hypertension | 41 (93.2%) | 13 (92.9%) | 28 (93.3%) | 0.953 |
| Hyperlipidaemia | 15 (34.1%) | 3 (21.4%) | 12 (40.0%) | 0.194 |
| Nicotine abuse | 7 (15.9%) | 3 (21.4%) | 4 (13.3%) | 0.396 |
| Diabetes mellitus | 5 (11.4%) | 2 (14.3%) | 3 (10.0%) | 0.515 |
| Coronary artery disease | 8 (18.2%) | 1 (7.1%) | 7 (23.3%) | 0.194 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease | 2 (4.5%) | 1 (7.1%) | 1 (3.3%) | 0.540 |
| Peripheral arterial vascular disease | 3 (6.8%) | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (10.0%) | 0.307 |
| Cerebrovascular disease | 3 (6.8%) | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (10.0%) | 0.307 |
| Previous stroke | 4 (9.1%) | 1 (7.1%) | 3 (10.0%) | 0.621 |
| Atrial fibrillation | 7 (15.9%) | 0 (0.0%) | 7 (23.3%) | 0.053 |
| Vitamin K antagonist or NOAC therapy | 7 (15.9%) | 0 (0.0%) | 7 (23.3%) | 0.053 |
| Chronic kidney failure | 2 (4.5%) | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (6.7%) | 0.460 |
| Peroperative Creatinine (mg/dL) | 0.95 ± 0.25 | 0.87 ± 0.18 | 0.98 ± 0.27 | 0.094 |
| Bovine arch | 3 (6.8%) | 1 (7.1%) | 2 (6.7%) | 0.693 |
| Clinical presentation | ||||
| NYHA I | 5 (11.4%) | 5 (35.7%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0.002 |
| NYHA II | 17 (38.6%) | 4 (28.6%) | 13 (43.3%) | 0.275 |
| NYHA III | 22 (50.0%) | 5 (35.7%) | 17 (56.7%) | 0.195 |
| Preoperative measurement | ||||
| Diameter of the ascending aortic (mm) | 51.2 ± 4.6 | 52.9 ± 5.3 | 50.4 ± 4.1 | 0.178 |
| Ejection fraction (%) | 59.9 ± 6.2 | 62.5 ± 4.2 | 58.7 ± 6.6 | 0.059 |
| total n=44 |
A n=14 |
B n=30 |
p-Value |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intraoperative Data | ||||
| Time to skin closure | 140.6 ± 33.2 | 121.0 ± 27.1 | 149.8 ± 32.2 | 0.006 |
| CBP time in min | 94.9 ± 32.5 | 68.6 ± 19.7 | 107.2 ± 30.0 | <0.001 |
| Aortic X-clamp time in min | 63.8 ± 25.9 | 42.9 ± 19.4 | 73.5 ± 22.7 | <0.001 |
| min. body temperature during CBP in °C | 35.5 ± 0.9 | 35.3 ± 0.9 | 35.6 ± 0.9 | 0.342 |
| Intraoperative Transfusion | ||||
| RBC | 0.4 ± 1.0 | 0.1 ± 0.3 | 0.5 ± 1.2 | 0.324 |
| FFP | 0.2 ± 1.1 | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 0.4 ± 1.3 | 0.321 |
| PC | 0.3 ± 0.6 | 0.1 ± 0.3 | 0.4 ± 0.6 | 0.168 |
| Postoperative Outcome | ||||
| Bleeding | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | - |
| Pericardial effusion | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | - |
| Re-thoracotomy | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | - |
| Myocardial infarction | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | - |
| Conversion to sternotomy | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | - |
| Renail failure | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | - |
| Stroke | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | - |
| Delirium | 4 (9.1%) | 1 (7.1%) | 3 (10.0%) | 0.621 |
| Atrial fibrillation | 9 (20.5%) | 0 (0.0%) | 9 (30.0%) | 0.020 |
| Pacemaker implantation | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | - |
| Wound infection | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | - |
| Mortality In-hospital mortality 30-day mortality 1-year mortality |
0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) |
0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) |
0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) |
- - - |
| Re-Intervention | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | - |
| Actual status alive | 44 (100.0%) | 14 (100.0%) | 30 (100.0%) | - |
| Postoperative Transfusion | ||||
| RBC | 0.8 ± 1.2 | 0.7 ± 0.9 | 0.8 ± 1.3 | 0.970 |
| FFP | 0.4 ± 1.3 | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 0.5 ± 1.5 | 0.217 |
| PC | 0.1 ± 0.3 | 0.0 ± 0.0 | 0.1 ± 0.4 | 0.488 |
| Ventilation time in h | 5.8 ± 7.6 | 6.1 ± 7.2 | 5.7 ± 7.9 | 0.710 |
| ICU time in h | 35.9 ± 23.5 | 36.4 ± 29.0 | 39.0 ± 27.3 | 0.164 |
| Length of hospital stay in d | 7.8 ± 3.0 | 8.5 ± 3.7 | 7.4 ± 2.6 | 0.321 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).