Single-Center Prospective Study of Cross-Clamp vs Balloon Occlusion in Robotic Mitral Surgery

Abstract

BackgroundTransthoracic aortic cross-clamp and endoaortic balloon occlusion have both been shown to have comparable safety profiles for aortic occlusion. Because most surgeons use only one technique, we sought to compare the outcomes when a homogeneous group of surgeons changed their occlusion technique from aortic cross-clamp to balloon occlusion. MethodsWe changed our technique from aortic cross-clamp to balloon occlusion in November 2022. This allowed us to conduct a prospective treatment comparison study in the same group of surgeons. Propensity score matching was used to match cases (balloon occlusion) 1:3 to controls (aortic cross-clamp) based on age, sex, body mass index, concomitant maze procedure, and tricuspid valve repair. ResultsTotal of 411 patients underwent robotic mitral surgery from 2020 through 2023. Propensity score matching was used to match 56 balloon occlusion patients to 168 aortic cross-clamp patients. The 224 patients were a median age of 65 years (interquartile range, 55.6-70.0 years), and 119 (53%) were men. All valves were successfully repaired. Balloon occlusion had a shorter median cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time compared with aortic cross-clamp (84.0 vs 94.5 minutes, P = .006). Median cross-clamp time (64.0 vs 64.0 minutes, P = .483) and total surgery time (5.9 vs 6.1 hours, P = .495) did not differ between groups. There were no in-hospital deaths. There were 5 surgeons who performed various combinations of console and bedside roles. CPB, cross-clamp, and surgery durations were not significantly affected by the different surgeon combinations. ConclusionsCompared with aortic cross-clamp, balloon occlusion has similar perioperative and early postoperative outcomes. Additionally, it likely introduces a 10-minute reduction in total CPB time.