EARLY OUTCOME OF THORACOSCOPIC MINIMALLY INVASIVE VERSUS CONVENTIONAL MITRAL VALVE SURGERY IN MITRAL VALVE DISEASES

Abstract

Background: Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery (MIMVS) is fast becoming an established treatment option for the treatment of mitral valve disease internationally. Increased recognition of advantages, of minimizing surgical trauma and its direct impact on reduced postoperative pain, quicker recovery, improved cosmosis and earlier return to work has spurred the minimally invasive cardiac surgical revolution. Objectives: Comparing the postoperative pain, cost, hospital stay, recovery speed and pulmonary function between minimally invasive and conventional mitral surgery. Moreover, assessment of thirty day mortality and early post-operative morbidity in both techniques. Patients and methods: This study was conducted on 50 patients requiring mitral valve surgery classified into 2 equal groups: Group A (Minimally invasive group), who were approached through a right Anterolateral video-assisted minithoracotomy. Group B (Sternotomy group), who were approached through a conventional median sternotomy. Results: There was no statistical difference between the two groups in baseline pre-operative characteristics regarding their age, sex, NYHA class, EF%, LA dimension and spirometric study. There was no operative mortality in both groups. Incision length, ventilation time, blood drainage, blood transfusion, ICU stay, total hospital stay were less in group A. Conclusion: In patients with mitral valve disease, MIMVS can be an alternative to conventional mitral valve surgery with comparable short-term mortality and in-hospital morbidity.