Minithoracotomy for mitral valve repair improves inpatient and postdischarge economic savings

ObjectiveSmall series of thoracotomy for mitral valve repair have demonstrated clinical benefit. This multi-institutional administrative database analysis compares outcomes of thoracotomy and sternotomy approaches for mitral repair.MethodsThe Premier database was queried from 2007 to 2011 for mitral repair hospitalizations. Premier contains billing, cost, and coding data from more than 600 US hospitals, totaling 25 million discharges. Thoracotomy and sternotomy approaches were identified through expert rules; robotics were excluded. Propensity matching on baseline characteristics was performed. Regression analysis of surgical approach on outcomes and costs was modeled.ResultsExpert rule analysis positively identified thoracotomy in 847 and sternotomy in 566. Propensity matching created 2 groups of 367. Mortalities were similar (thoracotomy 1.1% vs sternotomy 1.9%). Sepsis and other infections were significantly lower with thoracotomy (1.1% vs 4.4%). After adjustment for hospital differences, thoracotomy carried a 17.2% lower hospitalization cost (−$8289) with a 2-day stay reduction. Readmission rates were significantly lower with thoracotomy (26.2% vs 35.7% at 30 days and 31.6% vs 44.1% at 90 days). Thoracotomy was more common in southern and northeastern hospitals (63% vs 37% and 64% vs 36%, respectively), teaching hospitals (64% vs 36%) and larger hospitals (>600 beds, 78% vs 22%).ConclusionsRelative to sternotomy, thoracotomy for mitral repairs provides similar mortality, less morbidity, fewer infections, shorter stay, and significant cost savings during primary admission. The markedly lower readmission rates for thoracotomy will translate into additional institutional cost savings when a penalty on hospitals begins under the Affordable Care Act's Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program

Minimally invasive mitral valve replacement: Port-access technique, feasibility, and myocardial functional preservation

AbstractObjective: This experiment examined the feasibility of minimally invasive port-access mitral valve replacement via a 2.5 cm incision. Methods: The study evaluated valvular performance and myocardial functional recovery in six mongrel dogs after port-access mitral valve replacement with a St. Jude Medical prosthesis (St. Jude Medical, Inc., St. Paul, Minn.). Femoro-femoral cardiopulmonary bypass and a balloon catheter system for myocardial protection with cardioplegic arrest (Heartport, Inc., Redwood City, Calif.) were used. The mitral valve was replaced through a 2.5 cm port in the left side of the chest, and the animals were weaned from bypass. Cardiac function was measured before and at 30 and 60 minutes after bypass. Left ventricular pressure and electrical conductance volume were used to calculate changes in load-independent indexes of ventricular function. Results: Each procedure was successfully completed. Recovery of left ventricular function was excellent at 30 and 60 minutes after bypass compared with the prebypass values for elastance (30 minutes = 4.04 ± 0.97 and 60 minutes = 4.27 ± 0.57 vs prebypass = 4.45 ± 0.96; p = 0.51) and for preload recruitable stroke work (30 minutes = 76.23 ± 4.80 and 60 minutes = 71.21 ± 2.99 vs prebypass = 71.23 ± 3.75; p = 0.45). Preload recruitable work area remained at 96% and 85% of baseline at 30 and 60 minutes (p = not significant). In addition, transesophageal echocardiography demonstrated normal prosthetic valve function, as well as normal regional and global ventricular wall motion. Autopsy revealed secure annular-sewing apposition and normal leaflet motion. Conclusions: These results suggest that minimally invasive mitral valve replacement using percutaneous cardiopulmonary bypass with cardioplegic arrest is technically reproducible, achieves normal valve placement, and results in complete cardiac functional recovery. Minimally invasive mitral valve replacement is now feasible, and clinical trials are indicated. (J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1997; 113:1022-31

Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery III: Training and Robotic-Assisted Approaches.

Minimally invasive mitral valve operations are increasingly common in the United States, but robotic-assisted approaches have not been widely adopted for a variety of reasons. This expert opinion reviews the state of the art and defines best practices, training, and techniques for developing a successful robotics program

Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery I: Patient Selection, Evaluation, and Planning.

Widespread adoption of minimally invasive mitral valve repair and replacement may be fostered by practice consensus and standardization. This expert opinion, first of a 3-part series, outlines current best practices in patient evaluation and selection for minimally invasive mitral valve procedures, and discusses preoperative planning for cannulation and myocardial protection

Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery II: Surgical Technique and Postoperative Management.

Techniques for minimally invasive mitral valve repair and replacement continue to evolve. This expert opinion, the second of a 3-part series, outlines current best practices for nonrobotic, minimally invasive mitral valve procedures, and for postoperative care after minimally invasive mitral valve surgery

Teaching behaviors in the cardiac surgery simulation environment

OBJECTIVE: To understand how teaching behaviors contribute to simulation-based learning, we used a 7-category educational framework to assess the teaching behaviors used in basic skills training. METHODS: Twenty-four first-year cardiothoracic surgery residents and 20 faculty participated in the Boot Camp vessel anastomosis sessions. A portable chest model with synthetic graft and target vessels and a tissue-based porcine model simulated coronary artery anastomosis. After each 2-hour session on days 1 and 2, residents assessed teaching behaviors of faculty using a 20-item questionnaire based on the 5-point Likert scale. After session on day 1, faculty completed a self-assessment questionnaire. At 3 months, faculty completed self-assessment questionnaires regarding teaching behaviors in simulation and clinical settings. Each questionnaire item represents 1 or more teaching categories: "learning climate," "control of session," "communication of goals," "promoting understanding and retention," "evaluation," "feedback," and "self-directed learning." RESULTS: Generally, resident ratings indicated that faculty showed positive teaching behaviors. Faculty self-assessment ratings were all lower (P < .025) than those assigned to them by the residents except for 1 component representative of "feedback," which approached significance (P = .04); 2 items, representative of "promoting understanding and retention" and "evaluation", had mean scores of less than 3. At 3 months, compared with self-assessment at Boot Camp, faculty ratings suggested improved teaching behaviors in their simulation settings in the following: "learning climate," "control of session," "communication of goals," "promoting understanding and retention," and "evaluation." The simulation environment was perceived as more positive for technical skills training in certain aspects compared with clinical setting: instructor reviewed function and operation of equipment with learner before session (representative of "promoting understanding and retention") and instructor allowed the learner ample time to practice (representative of "control of session" and "promoting understanding and retention") (P < .025). CONCLUSIONS: Simulation-based skills training is perceived by residents to be associated with positive teaching behaviors. Faculty self-ratings indicate that they do not always use many of these teaching behaviors and that their performance can be improved. The simulation setting may provide greater opportunity for positive teaching behaviors compared with the clinical environment

TRANSFORM (Multicenter Experience With Rapid Deployment Edwards INTUITY Valve System for Aortic Valve Replacement) US clinical trial: Performance of a rapid deployment aortic valve

Background: The TRANSFORM (Multicenter Experience With Rapid Deployment Edwards INTUITY Valve System for Aortic Valve Replacement) trial (NCT01700439) evaluated the performance of the INTUITY rapid deployment aortic valve replacement (RDAVR) system in patients with severe aortic stenosis. Methods: TRANSFORM was a prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter (n 1�4 29), single-arm trial. INTUITY is comprised of a cloth-covered balloon- expandable frame attached to a Carpentier-Edwards PERIMOUNT Magna Ease aortic valve. Primary and effectiveness endpoints were evaluated at 1 year. Results: Between 2012 and 2015, 839 patients underwent RDAVR. Mean age was 73.5 8.3 years. Full sternotomy (FS) was used in 59% and minimally invasive surgical incisions in 41%. Technical success rate was 95%. For isolated RDAVR, mean crossclamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times for FS were 49.3 26.9 minutes and 69.2 34.7 minutes, respectively, and for minimally invasive surgical 63.1 25.4 minutes and 84.6 33.5 minutes, respectively. These times were favorable compared with Society of Thoracic Surgeons data- base comparators for FS: 76.3 minutes and 104.2 minutes, respectively, and for minimally invasive surgical, 82.9 minutes and 111.4 minutes, respectively (P<.001). At 30 days, all-cause mortality was 0.8%; valve explant, 0.1%; throm- boembolism, 3.5%; and major bleeding, 1.3%. In patients with isolated aortic valve replacement, the rate of permanent pacemaker implantation was 11.9%. At 1 year, mean effective orifice area was 1.7 cm2; mean gradient, 10.3 mm Hg; and moderate and severe paravalvular leak, 1.2% and 0.4%, respectively