Reoperative Mitral Valve Surgery Research Articles

Mitral valve replacement in young patients: review and current challenges.

Mitral valve repair is the ideal intervention for mitral valve disease with excellent long-term survival comparable to the age-matched general population. When the mitral valve is not repairable, mechanical prostheses may be associated with improved survival as compared with biological prostheses. Newer mechanical and biological valve prostheses have the potential to improve outcomes following mitral valve replacement in young patients. Patients presenting for mitral valve surgery after failed transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve have high rates of postoperative mortality and morbidity, exceeding those seen with reoperative mitral valve surgery, which poses issues in young patients who have a higher cumulative incidence of reintervention.

Mini-thoracotomy and full-sternotomy approach for reoperative mitral valve surgery after a previous sternotomy.

OBJECTIVESRight mini-thoracotomy approach may enhance the visualization of mitral valve (MV) visualization during redo MV surgery, thereby minimizing the risk of reoperative median sternotomy. We described the clinical outcomes of redo MV surgery by mini-thoracotomy and full-sternotomy approach.METHODSOf 730 consecutive adult patients who underwent redo MV surgery between 2002 and 2018 at our institution, we identified 380 patients (age: 56.0 [14.8] years) after excluding those who underwent concomitant aortic valve or coronary artery surgeries.RESULTSThe clinical outcomes in patients who underwent mini-thoracotomy (MINI group; n = 168) and full-sternotomy (STERN group; n = 218) were described. The early and overall mortality in the MINI group was 4.3% (7/162) and 17.3% (28/162), with the rates of early major complications as follows: low cardiac output syndrome, 5.6% (9/162); early stroke, 6.8% (11/162); new-onset dialysis, 6.2% (10/162); prolonged ventilation, 15.4% (25/162); and postoperative bleeding requiring exploration, 7.4% (12/162). In the STERN group, the early mortality was 11.0% (24/218), whereas the risk of low cardiac output syndrome, early stroke, new-onset dialysis, prolonged ventilation, and postoperative bleeding was 12.4% (27/218), 14.2% (31/218), 17.0% (37/218), 33.0% (72/218), and 10.1% (22/218), respectively. The duration of intensive care unit and hospital stay was 2.0 [range 1.0, 3.0] and 8.0 [6.0, 13.0], respectively, in the MINI group and 3.0 [2.0, 7.0] and 14.0 [8.0, 29.0], respectively, in the STERN group.CONCLUSIONSMini-thoracotomy may be a viable alternative to conventional sternotomy for redo MV surgery.

Mini-thoracotomy in redo mitral valve surgery: safety and efficacy of a standardized procedure.

BackgroundRe-operative mitral valve surgery is sometimes burdened by a greater technical difficulty and a higher complications rate than the first operation. Minimally invasive cardiac surgery has become routine, and it could significantly reduce the surgical risk in redo surgery. The objective of our retrospective observational study is to assess the results of cardiac reoperations in patients with mitral valve disease approached trough a 5–7 cm right mini-thoracotomy.MethodsFrom February 2017 to December 2019, 65 patients underwent re-operative mitral valve surgery in our institution. Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) was started by cannulation of the femoral and jugular vein and femoral artery or alternatively right axillary artery. Patients enrolled had a mean age of 66.6±11.5 years. Patients were divided into three groups based on the procedure adopted: external aortic cross-clamp (EAC), EndoAortic balloon occlusion (EABO) and ventricular fibrillation (VF). Major complications were evaluated and compared with a propensity matched population of patients undergoing elective isolated mitral valve surgery via right minithoracotomy (MVS).ResultsThe average time between last operation and reoperation was 7.1±3.4 years. Fourteen patients (21%) underwent mitral valve repair and 51 patients (78%) underwent mitral valve replacement; 9 patients (14%) received tricuspid valve surgery. There was no statistically significant difference in CPB time between the groups. Seven patients (11%) had a postoperative renal failure, 5 patients (8%) underwent surgical reopening for bleeding; incidence of post-operative stroke and pace-maker implantation was 3% for both. No deaths were registered during in-hospital stay and at 30-days echocardiographic control all patients respect the criterions of device success according with MVARC. Propensity matched patients of group redo had a longer CPB time (100.8±42.7 versus 72.8±16.7 min, P<0.001) and cross-clamp time (71.9±30.7 versus 59±10.7 min, P<0.001) respect to first operation mitral valve surgery patients.ConclusionsMinimally invasive mitral valve redo surgery is a safe procedure. Less invasive techniques in redo surgery could minimize morbidity and mortality without prolonging the duration of CPB.

Reoperative Mitral Valve Surgery Through Port Access

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) has become the standard approach for mitral valve pathology in many centres. The anterolateral mini thoracotomy access is beneficial in reoperative surgery by avoiding repeat sternotomy associated risks. The aim of this study is to analyse the safety of this technique. All patients undergoing reoperative MIMVS between 2008 and 2019 were studied retrospectively. Primary endpoint was 30-day major complications and mortality; secondary outcome was long term survival, reoperation rate and rate of more than moderate recurrent regurgitation. 146 Patients underwent reoperative MIMVS with a mean age of 68 ± 8 years. The composite outcome of 30-day major complication and mortality was 29.5%. 30-Day mortality was 6.2% and stroke rate 3.4%. Survival for the whole cohort was 89.7 ± 2.5% at 1-year, 71.6 ± 4.3% at 5 year and 50.9 ± 5.9% at 8-year follow up. Cox regression analysis revealed reduced left ventricular function (HR 2.8; 95%CI 1.5 - 5.0), GFR < 60 (HR 2.1; 95%CI 1.2 - 3.7) and active endocarditis (HR 6.4; 95%CI 2.7 - 15.4) as variables associated with reduced long-term survival. The cumulative incidence of re-operation after mitral valve replacement was 11.3 ± 3.2% at 5-year and for repair 16.2 ± 7.5% at 5-year. The cumulative incidence of more than moderate recurrent regurgitation after mitral valve repair was 25.4 ± 9.0% at 3-year. Minimally invasive access in reoperative mitral valve surgery in the current study showed similar 30-day mortality and stroke rate compared to repeat sternotomy results reported in literature.

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery after previous sternotomy: A propensity-matched analysis.

Although the incidence of mitral valve (MV) surgery after previous open-heart surgery is increasing, there is no consensus regarding the optimal surgical approach. Reoperative MV surgery is most commonly performed via sternotomy (ST). We sought to determine whether minimally-invasive (MIS) reoperative MV surgery is safe and feasible. All patients with a history of ST undergoing MV surgery with or without concomitant tricuspid or atrial fibrillation surgery at a single institution from 2007 to 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. ST and MIS approaches were compared using propensity-matched analysis. The coprimary endpoints were operative mortality and 1-year survival, and secondary endpoints were operative complications and length of stay. A total of 305 isolated MV reoperations were performed: 199 (65%) MIS and 106 (35%) ST. MIS patients were older than ST patients (71 [63, 76.5] vs. 66 [56, 72] years, p < .01), more likely to have undergone prior coronary artery bypass grafting (57% vs. 27%, p < .01), and less likely to have had prior valve surgery (55% vs. 78%, p < .01). In unmatched comparisons, operative mortality was significantly lower among MIS patients (3.0% vs. 8.5%, p = .04), but 1-year mortality was similar (14.4% vs. 15.6%, p = .8). After propensity matching, 88 pairs had excellent balance across baseline characteristics. Mortality was similar among MIS and ST patients at 30 days (3.4% vs. 8%, p = .19) and 1 year (15.9% vs. 16.5%, p = .9). RBC and fresh frozen plasma transfusions were significantly lower in the MIS group (p < .01). A minimally invasive approach is a safe alternative in patients with prior ST undergoing MV surgery.

Reoperative Mitral Surgery Versus Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review.

Bioprosthetic mitral structural valve degeneration and failed mitral valve repair (MVr) have traditionally been treated with reoperative mitral valve surgery. Transcatheter mitral valve‐in‐valve (MVIV) and valve‐in‐ring (MVIR) replacement are now feasible, but data comparing these approaches are lacking. We sought to compare the outcomes of (1) reoperative mitral valve replacement (redo‐MVR) and MVIV for structural valve degeneration, and (2) reoperative mitral valve repair (redo‐MVr) or MVR and MVIR for failed MVr. A literature search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was conducted up to July 31, 2020. Thirty‐two studies involving 25 832 patients were included. Redo‐MVR was required in ≈35% of patients after index surgery at 10 years, with 5% to 15% 30‐day mortality. MVIV resulted in >95% procedural success with 30‐day and 1‐year mortality of 0% to 8% and 11% to 16%, respectively. Recognized complications included left ventricular outflow tract obstruction (0%–6%), valve migration (0%–9%), and residual regurgitation (0%–6%). Comparisons of redo‐MVR and MVIV showed no statistically significant differences in mortality (11.3% versus 11.9% at 1 year, P=0.92), albeit higher rates of major bleeding and arrhythmias with redo‐MVR. MVIR resulted in 0% to 34% mortality at 1 year, whereas both redo‐MVr and MVR for failed repairs were performed with minimal mortality and durable long‐term results. MVIV is therefore a viable alternative to redo‐MVR for structural valve degeneration, whereas redo‐MVr or redo‐MVR is preferred for failed MVr given the suboptimal results with MVIR. However, not all patients will be candidates for MVIV/MVIR because anatomical restrictions may preclude transcatheter options from adequately addressing the underlying pathology.

Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation vs. reoperative mitral valve surgery for failing surgical prosthesis

Vessel Plus is an open acccess journal, which publishes articles related to vascular diseases, including acute respiratory distress syndrome, aneurysm, atherosclerosis, hypertension, stroke, peripheral vascular or pulmonary vascular diseases, etc.

Contemporary Reoperative Mitral Valve Surgery: Technical Considerations and Clinical Outcomes.

As patients with cardiac disease live longer, reoperative mitral valve surgery has become more common. Although these operations are technically challenging and of high risk, outcomes continue to improve. Minimally invasive techniques, better cardioprotective strategies, and advanced perioperative care have contributed to this. In this review, we discuss surgical approaches, intraoperative strategies, novel catheter-directed devices, and clinical outcomes of contemporary reoperative mitral valve surgery.

Right mini-thoracotomy approach in patients undergoing redo mitral valve procedure.

A minimally invasive technique is an attractive option in cardiac surgery. In this study, we present our experience with minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) via right mini-thoracotomy on patients undergoing mitral valve procedure as reoperation. From 2017 until 2019, 20 patients underwent reoperation of the mitral valve through a right-sided mini-thoracotomy. Cardiopulmonary bypass was established through cannulation of the femoral vessels. All patients requiring isolated re-operative mitral valve surgery with suitable femoral vessels for cannulation were included in the study. Patients requiring concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or with peripheral artery disease were excluded. The mean age was 65 ± 12years. The average log. EuroSCORE was 9 ± 5%. Ten patients with severe mitral valve regurgitation (MR) underwent re-repair of the mitral valve. Seven of them were post mitral valve repair (MVR), one was post aortic valve replacement (AVR), one had tricuspid valve repair, and one other patient had CABG before. Ten patients underwent mitral valve replacement due to mixed mitral valve disease (n = 9) or mitral valve endocarditis (n = 1). Eight patients were post MVR and 2 had AVR before. The mean time to reoperation was 7.5 ± 8years. In-hospital mortality was 5% (n = 1). The mean cross clamp time was 54 ± 26min. Postoperative echocardiography revealed competent valve function in all cases with mean ejection fraction of 55 ± 9%. The Kaplan-Meier 1- and 2-year survival was 95%. The MICS approach for mitral valve reoperation in selected patients seems to be safe and feasible. It is also a surgical option for high-risk patients.

The Trans-Septal Approach In Transcatheter Mitral Valve-In-Valve Implantation For Degenerative Bioprosthesis

Background Transcatheter Mitral Valve-in-Valve Implantation (TMViVI) has recently emerged as a novel therapy for degenerated mitral valve bioprosthesis. Re-operative mitral valve surgery is associated with a substantial risk of mortality and morbidity. The objective of this study was to describe the outcomes of transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve implantations in our cardiac center. Methods Twenty-two patients underwent the valve-in-valve procedure because of bioprosthesis degeneration from March 2017 to October 2018. Clinical, echocardiographic, procedural details and survival at follow up were assessed. Results Eight patients refused re-operative cardiac surgery while others were deemed a high risk for conventional re-operative sternotomy. All patients had TMViVI performed via a trans-septal approach, and the prosthesis was implanted successfully with immediate hemodynamic improvement in 20 patients. One patient had tamponade (4.55%), two had permanent pacemaker insertion (9.09%), two patients had a renal impairment (9.09%), and three patients had vascular complications (13.64%). There was one aborted procedure for the failure to cross the tissue valve with a transcatheter valve, and one patient was converted to an emergency mitral valve surgery. All patients were discharged in NYHA class I/II and NYHA class was markedly improved at one-year follow-up (p = 0.002). Conclusions Trans-septal mitral valve-in-valve implantation can be performed safely for degenerative mitral valve bioprosthesis and with favorable early clinical and hemodynamic outcomes.

The trans-septal approach in transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve implantation for degenerative bioprosthesis.

BackgroundTranscatheter Mitral Valve-in-Valve Implantation (TMViVI) has recently emerged as a novel therapy for degenerated mitral valve bioprosthesis. Re-operative mitral valve surgery is associated with a substantial risk of mortality and morbidity. The objective of this study was to describe the outcomes of transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve implantations in our cardiac center.MethodsTwenty-two patients underwent the valve-in-valve procedure because of bioprosthesis degeneration from March 2017 to October 2018. Clinical, echocardiographic, procedural details and survival at follow up were assessed.ResultsEight patients refused re-operative cardiac surgery while others were deemed a high risk for conventional re-operative sternotomy. All patients had TMViVI performed via a trans-septal approach, and the prosthesis was implanted successfully with immediate hemodynamic improvement in 20 patients. One patient had tamponade (4.55%), two had permanent pacemaker insertion (9.09%), two patients had a renal impairment (9.09%), and three patients had vascular complications (13.64%). There was one aborted procedure for the failure to cross the tissue valve with a transcatheter valve, and one patient was converted to an emergency mitral valve surgery. All patients were discharged in NYHA class I/II and NYHA class was markedly improved at one-year follow-up (p = 0.002).ConclusionsTrans-septal mitral valve-in-valve implantation can be performed safely for degenerative mitral valve bioprosthesis and with favorable early clinical and hemodynamic outcomes.

Outcomes of Reoperative Mitral Valve Surgery: A Single Centre Experience Over 20 Years

Objective: Reoperative mitral valve surgery is being performed increasingly, approaching a rate as high as 10% of all mitral operations according to literature. It is associated with a relatively h...

Predictors of Stroke After Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery Without the Cross-Clamp

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (mini-MVS) with hypothermic fibrillatory arrest has been associated with an increased risk of stroke. We aim to investigate the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of stroke in a large cohort of patient who underwent clampless mini-MVS. Between January 2008 and June 2017, we performed 1247 mini-MVSs. The clinical, operative, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were used to identify predictors of postoperative stroke. The median follow-up was 5.2 years (interquartile range 2.6-7.5). The etiology of mitral valve (MV) disease was degenerative (60.4%, n = 753), functional (12.8%, n = 160), rheumatic (8.7%, n = 109), endocarditis (3.1%, n = 39), and reoperative MV surgery (14.9%, n = 186). The overall incidence of postoperative neurologic event was 2.5% (n = 31/1247). Univariable predictors of stroke were a higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons mortality risk (6.0 ± 11.8% vs 3.3 ± 5.2%, P < 0.001), advanced age, (69.6 ± 12.1 years vs 63.0 ± 13.6 years, P = 0.002), female gender (71.0% vs 46.3%, P = 0.007), and a history of a cerebrovascular accident (22.6% vs 8.7%, P = 0.008). Stroke patients had a higher 30-day mortality (22.6% vs 1.6%, P < 0.001) and a higher risk for long-term mortality (hazard ratio = 5.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.2-9.6, P < 0.001). Advanced age (odds ratio [OR] 2.1; 95% CI 1.1-4.0; P = 0.02), female gender (OR 2.3; 95% CI 0.9-5.2; P = 0.05), and history of cerebrovascular accident (OR 3.1; 95% CI 0.98-10.1; P = 0.05) remained as independent predictors of stroke in the multivariable analysis. Our decade-long experience indicates that clampless mini-MVS is associated with a low incidence of postoperative stroke, and that the predictors of stroke are not specific to this approach.

Reoperative mitral valve surgery via sternotomy or right thoracotomy: A propensity-matched analysis.

There is, as yet, no broad consensus regarding the optimal surgical approach for patients requiring reoperative mitral valve surgery. Consequently, we sought to evaluate the perioperative outcomes for patients undergoing redo mitral surgery via right mini thoracotomy as compared with traditional resternotomy. A comprehensive retrospective review of our prospectively collected database was undertaken from January 2011 to December 2017. We propensity matched 90 patients who underwent reoperative mitral valve surgery via right mini thoracotomy with a concurrent cohort of patients who had redo median sternotomy. Intraoperative data and short-term clinical outcomes were analyzed. The 30-day mortality was 3.3% (six deaths) in the entire cohort, not significantly different between redo sternotomy and mini thoracotomy groups. Patients who had their procedure via right mini thoracotomy had reduced intensive care unit (P = .029) and overall hospital (P < .0001) lengths of stay, a diminished requirement for perioperative transfusion (P = .023), and a trend towards faster postoperative extubation. Right thoracotomy patients experienced shorter cardiopulmonary bypass (P = .012) and cardiac arrest (P < .0001) times than did the sternotomy cases. Peripheral cannulation was utilized more frequently in the mini thoracotomy group, as were fibrillatory arrest techniques. Reoperative mitral valve surgery via right mini thoracotomy is safe, and is associated with shorter extracorporeal circulation times, reduced transfusion, and faster postoperative recovery.

EP10 DIRECT AORTIC CROSS-CLAMPING IN REDO MITRAL VALVE SURGERY VIA RIGHT MINI-THORACOTOMY

Abstract Background And Aim: Reoperative mitral valve surgery is burdened by a greater technical difficulty and a higher complications rate respect to first operation. When in a heart centre minimally invasive surgery has become routine, the application of this to reoperations may represent the way to greatly reduce the surgical risk. The objective of the study is to assess results within the last year of technically difficult reoperations in 10pts with mitral valve disease approached trough a 5–7 cm right mini-thoracotomy with direct cross clamping. Methods: Cardiopulmonary bypass was installed by cannulation of femoral vein (internal jugular vein in case of tricuspid concomitant surgery) and axillary or femoral artery. Aorta was partially isolated and directly cross-clamped by the same incision. Results: Patients enrolled had a median age 68 years (IQR I-III 61–75). Median time between last operation and reoperation was 7 years (IQR I-III 4–11): 1 patient underwent mitral valve repair, 9 patients to mitral valve replacement and 3 of these also received tricuspid annuloplasty. Median Euroscore I was 8.5 (IQR I-III 6.1–12). Median cross-clamp time was 68 min (IQR I-III 51–86) and median cardiopulmonary bypass time was 88 min (IQR I-III 68.8–119). 1 patient had a postoperative renal failure requiring CVVH and 1 patient underwent surgical reoperation for bleeding. There were no deaths at 30day follow-up. Conclusions: Direct aortic cross-clamping in minimally invasive mitral valve surgery reoperations is a safe procedure. The use of less invasive techniques in reoperations may minimize morbidity and mortality, without prolonging duration of cardiopulmonary bypass.

Clinical Outcomes of Mitral Valve Reoperations in the United States: An Analysis of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database

This study evaluated outcomes of reoperative mitral valve surgery (MVS) in the United States. Adults undergoing isolated MVS with prior open-heart operation in The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) National Database between July 2011 and September 2016 were included. Urgent or emergent operations as well as all indications and causes for MVS were included. Primary outcomes were operative mortality and morbidity. Multivariable models were used for risk-adjustment, incorporating variables from the STS Valve Risk Model as well as type of prior operation and reoperative approach. A total of 17,195 patients underwent isolated reoperative MVS at 962 centers. The STS predicted risk of mortality was 8.0%, with 20% having an STS predicted risk of mortality greater than 10%. Prior cardiac operations included previous MVS (61%), coronary artery bypass (39%), aortic valve surgery (18%), and tricuspid valve surgery (6%). Operative mortality for the overall study cohort was 6.6%, and postoperative stroke occurred in 2.4%. Observed-to-expected mortality for the overall cohort was 0.82. The strongest independent predictors of operative mortality included salvage operation, preoperative dialysis dependence, congestive heart failure, recent myocardial infarction, and active endocarditis. Prior aortic valve replacement was associated with increased mortality risk, whereas prior MVS reduced mortality risk. Surgical approach did not affect mortality. For patients with prior MVS undergoing elective, non-endocarditis operations, the operative mortality was3.4%. Despite a high-risk patient profile, surgical outcomes of reoperative MVS were acceptable, particularly in patients with prior MVS and without endocarditis undergoing elective operations.

Right minithoracotomy versus median sternotomy for reoperative mitral valve surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

Reoperative mitral valve surgery (MVS) through a median sternotomy (ST-MVS) can be particularly challenging due to dense adhesions and is known to carry a substantial risk of injuries to vascular structures. These injuries occur in 7-9% of cases and are associated with increased mortality rates. A valid alternative that could avoid the risks associated with redo ST-MVS is the right anterolateral minithoracotomy (MT-MVS) approach. The aim of this study was to quantify the effects of MT-MVS compared with those of ST-MVS on morbidity and mortality among patients who underwent prior cardiac surgery through a sternotomy. The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched through 1 November 2017. Data regarding mortality, stroke, reoperation for bleeding and length of hospital stay were extracted and submitted to a meta-analysis using random effects modelling and the I2-test for heterogeneity. Six retrospective observational studies were included, enrolling a total of 777 patients. In a pooled analysis, MT-MVS demonstrated reduced mortality rates compared to a standard sternotomy [odds ratio (OR) 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18-0.96; P = 0.04]. MT-MVS was, moreover, associated with reduced length of hospital stay [difference between the means was -3.81, 95% CI -5.53 to -2.08; P < 0.0001) and reoperation for bleeding (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.10-0.99; P = 0.0488). The incidence of stroke was similar (OR 1.51, 95% CI 0.65-3.54; P = 0.34), all in the absence of heterogeneity. In conclusion, reoperative minimally invasive MVS through a minithoracotomy is a safe alternative to standard sternotomy, with reduced mortality rates, length of hospital stay and reoperations for bleeding and a comparable risk of stroke. However, because the existing literature provided limited, low-quality evidence, more methodologically rigorous randomized controlled trials are needed.

Right anterolateral thoracotomy: an attractive alternative to repeat sternotomy for high-risk patients undergoing reoperative mitral and tricuspid valve surgery

BackgroundReoperative cardiac valve surgery via sternotomy is associated with a substantial morbidity and mortality. This study evaluated the right anterolateral thoracotomy for high-risk patients undergoing mitral and tricuspid valve redo procedures.MethodsOut of a series of 173 patients undergoing redo cardiac valve surgery, 24 patients were reoperative via the right anterolateral thoracotomy as the high-risk group on the basis of the proximity of the heart and great vessels to the sternum and the presence and location of patent bypass grafts.ResultsIn all cases, sternotomy was avoided. The mitral valve and tricuspid valve were replaced in 4 and 19 patients and repaired in 1 and 2 patients, respectively. Moreover, left atrial folding was performed in 5 patients. Mortality was 8.3%. All other patients had uneventful outcomes and normal valve function at follow-up.ConclusionsReoperative cardiac valve surgery can be performed safely using the right anterolateral thoracotomy in high-risk patients. It offers enough exposure. It minimizes the need for cardiac dissection, and thus, the risk for injury. Avoiding a high-risk resternotomy increases patients comfort and safety of redo mitral and tricuspid valve surgery.

Percutaneous Approach to the Mitral Valve: The Prince Charles Experience

Purpose: Open-heart surgery remains the gold standard for the treatment of severe mitral valve disease. The modern challenge facing surgeons, to provide a safe intervention for the rising population of high-risk patients presenting for either primary or redo surgery, has led to the development of novel percutaneous approaches to the mitral valve. We describe our initial experience with transcatheter mitral valve replacements in high-risk patients. Methodology: Ten patients (mean age 82 ± 2 years) received transapical transcatheter mitral valve implantation between February 2011 and June 2016. All patients were considered high risk for conventional surgery after evaluation by a multidisciplinary heart team. Implantation of a balloon-expandable heart valve (Sapien) into a degenerated mitral valve bioprosthesis was performed in four patients, whilst six received a self-expanding bioprosthesis (Tendyne) for severe mitral regurgitation. Results: Implantation was successful in all patients, with reduction of median mitral regurgitation from grade 4 (IQR: 3-4) to 0 (p < 0.01). Trace paravalvular regurgitation was seen in 3 patients. In-hospital mortality occurred in 2 patients due to stroke and septic shock, on postoperative days 3 and 13, respectively. Length of stay was 10 (IQR: 8-12) days. NYHA class improved from 3 (IQR: 3-4) to 2 (IQR: 1.5-2, P < 0.01) over a median follow-up of 30 (range 30-958) days. Conclusion: Transapical transcatheter mitral valve replacement may provide an alternative strategy to deal with the increasing rise of high-risk patients presenting for primary and reoperative mitral valve surgery. Our initial experience with this approach has demonstrated its early feasibility in select patients.

Combined Mitral and Tricuspid Valve Surgery Performed via a Right Minithoracotomy Approach.

Combined mitral and tricuspid valve surgery is associated with an increased perioperative morbidity and mortality. We evaluated the outcomes of a less invasive right minithoracotomy approach in patients undergoing primary or reoperative double-valve surgery. We retrospectively evaluated 132 consecutive patients with mitral and tricuspid valve disease who underwent double-valve surgery via a right minithoracotomy at our institution between January 2009 and April 2014. The cohort included 81 female (61%) and 51 male (39%) patients, with a mean ± SD age of 67 ± 13 years. The mean ± SD preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction, mitral regurgitation grade, and creatinine were 53% ± 12%, 3.8 ± 0.6, and 1.26 ± 1.17, respectively. The patients underwent primary (88%) or reoperative (12%) mitral and tricuspid valve surgery, which consisted of 88 mitral repairs (67%), 44 mitral replacements (33%), 131 tricuspid repairs (99%), and 1 tricuspid replacement (1%). Postoperatively, there were 6 cases of acute kidney injury (5%), 6 reoperations for bleeding (5%), 4 cerebrovascular accidents (3%), and 12 cases of atrial fibrillation (9%). The median intensive care unit length of stay and total hospital lengths of stay were 61 hours (interquartile range, 43-112 hours) and 8 days (interquartile range, 6-13 days), respectively. The in-hospital mortality was 4%. Actuarial survival at 1 and 5 years was 93% and 88%, respectively. In patients undergoing primary or reoperative mitral and tricuspid valve surgery, a right minithoracotomy approach is associated with a low perioperative morbidity and good midterm survival.