Minimally Invasive versus Conventional Mitral Valve Surgery Comparison of Early Outcomes

Abstract

Abstract The mitral valve has been traditionally approached through a median sternotomy. However, mitral valve surgery could be performed using smaller incisions including the right minithoracotomy. This study was a case-control non randomized conducted on 60 patients. All patients had isolated mitral valve disease for mitral valve surgery, 30 of them were operated through right anterolateral minithoracotomy and the others through full median sternotomy to study the effects of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery through right anterolateral minithoracotomy on morbidity and mortality compared with conventional mitral surgery. Medico legal concent was taken from all the patients in this study. All the patients completed the study and there was no mortality among the patients. There was no statistically significant difference as regards the demograohic data, NYHA score and the preoperative echocardiographic findings. Regarding intraoperative comparison, there was statistically significant difference in the cross-clamp time, total bypass time & total operation time. This difference may be due to the new experiences in this MIMVS and the lack of instrumentation that narrow the field of MIMVS. The length of the incision was highly significantly lesser in the minimally invasive group than the full sternotomy group. There was significant difference in the intensive care parameters. The blood loss and the blood transfusion required were lesser in the minimally invasive group. But the ventilation hours and ICU stay was nearly the same in both groups. There was highly significantly less postoperative pain in the minimally invasive group than in the stenotomy group. Total hospital stay was nearly the same in both groups. Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery is a safe alternative to a conventional approach and is associated with less morbidity especially with expert surgeon in simple mitral valve surgery.