Ministernotomy versus conventional sternotomy for aortic valve replacement: Matched propensity score analysis of 808 patients

European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery

Volumn 46, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 221-227

  Furukawa, Nobuyuki ^a   Kuss, Oliver ^b   Aboud, Anas ^a   Schönbrodt, Michael ^a   Renner, Andre ^a   Hakim meibodi, Kavous ^a   Becker, Tobias ^a   Zittermann, Amin ^a   Gummert, Jan F ^a   Börgermann, Jochen ^a  

^a RUHR UNIVERSITY BOCHUM   (Germany)

^b Department of Orthopedic Surgery   (Germany)

Author keywords

Aortic valve replacement; Minimally invasive cardiac surgery; Propensity score analysis

Indexed keywords

LOW MOLECULAR WEIGHT HEPARIN; WARFARIN;

ADULT; AGED; AORTA VALVE REPLACEMENT; ARTICLE; CARDIOVASCULAR MORTALITY; CARDIOVASCULAR RISK; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; CONVENTIONAL STERNOTOMY; DIALYSIS; FEMALE; FORWARD HEART FAILURE; HEART INFARCTION; HEART SURGERY; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; INTENSIVE CARE UNIT; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTRAAORTIC BALLOON PUMP; LENGTH OF STAY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MINIMALLY INVASIVE PROCEDURE; MINISTERNOTOMY; MORBIDITY; OPERATION DURATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROPENSITY SCORE; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; STERNOTOMY; SURGICAL APPROACH; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; ADVERSE EFFECTS; AORTA VALVE; HEART DEFECTS, CONGENITAL; HEART VALVE DISEASES; HEART VALVE REPLACEMENT; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; MORTALITY; PROCEDURES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; VERY ELDERLY;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AORTIC VALVE; FEMALE; HEART DEFECTS, CONGENITAL; HEART VALVE DISEASES; HEART VALVE PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; HUMANS; MALE; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGICAL PROCEDURES; PROPENSITY SCORE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK FACTORS; STERNOTOMY;

EID: 84902012103     PISSN: 10107940     EISSN: 1873734X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ejcts/ezt616     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Cosgrove DM III, Sabik J. Minimally invasive approach to aortic valve operations. Ann Thorac Surg 1996;62:596-7.
2. Murtuza B, Pepper JR, Stanbridge RD, Jones C, Rao C, Darzi A et al. Minimal access aortic valve replacement: is it worth? Ann Thorac Surg 2008;85:1121-31.
3. Johnston DR, Atik FA, Rajeswaran J, Blackstone EH, Nowicki ER, Sabik JF III et al. Outcomes of less invasive J-incision approach to aortic valve surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2012;144:852-8.
4. Korach a, Shemin RJ, Hunter CT, Bao Y, Shapira OM. Minimally invasive versus conventional aortic valve replacement: a 10-year experience. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 2010;51:417-21.
5. Johnston WF, Ailawadi G. Surgical management of minimally invasive aortic valve operations. Semin Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2012;16:41-51.
6. Brown ML, Mcjekkar SH, Sybdt TM, Schaff HV. Ministernotomy versus conventional sternotomy for aortic valve replacement: a systemic review and meta-analysis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2009;137:670-9.
7. Bakir I, Casselman F, Wellens F, Jeanmart H, De Geest R, Dogrieck I et al. Minimally invasive versus standard approach aortic valve replacement: a study in 506 patients. Ann Thorac Surg 2006;81:1599-604.
8. Masiello P, Coscioni E, Panza A, Triumbari F, Presiosi G, Dibenedetto G. Surgical results of aortic valve replacement via partial upper sternotomy: comparison with median sternotomy. Cardiovasc Surg 2002;10:333-8.
9. Calderon J, Richebe P, Guibaud JP, Coiffic A, Branchard O, Asselineau J et al. Prospective randomized study of early pulmonary evaluation of patients scheduled for aortic valve surgery performed by ministernotomy or total median sternotomy. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2009;23:795-801.
10. Christiansen S, Stypmann J, Tjan TD, Wichter T, Van Aken H, Scheld HH et al. Minimally-invasive versus conventional aortic valve replacement: perioperative course and mid-term results. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1999; 16:647-52.
11. Nagy Zl, Peterffy A. Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement: a word of caution. Ann Thorac Surg 2007;84:1071.
12. Koetting J, Schiller W, Beckmann A, Schaefer E, Doebler K, Hamm C et al. German aortic valve score: anew scoring system for prediction of mortality related to aortic valve procedures in adults. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2013; 43:971-7.
13. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 1983;70:41-55.
14. Kuss O. The z-difference can be used to measure covariate balance in matched propensity score analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 2013;66:1302-7.
15. Gulbins H, Pritisanac A, Ennker J. Axillary versus femoral cannulation for aortic surgery enough evidence for a general recommendation?. Ann Thorac Surg 2007;83:1219-24.
16. Tabata M, Umakanthan R, Khalpey Z, Couper GS, Aranki SF, Cohn LH et al. Full sternotomy conversion following minimal access cardiac surgery: reasons and rationales during a 9.5year experience. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2007;134:165-9.
17. Grossi EA, Loulmet DF, Schwartz CF, Solomon B, Dellis SL, Culliford AT et al. Minimally invasive valve surgery with antegrade perfusion strategy is not associated with increased neurologic complications. Ann Thorac Surg 2011;92:1346-9.
18. Wan S, LeClerc JL, Vincent JL. Inflammatory response to cardiopulmonary bypass: mechanisms involved and possible therapeutic strategies. Chest 1997;112:676-92.
19. Asimakopoulos G. Systemic inflammation and cardiac surgery: an update. Perfusion 2001;16:353-60.
20. Santana O, Reyna J, Grana R, Buendia M, Lamas GA, Lamelas J. Outcomes of minimally invasive valve surgery versus standard sternotomy in obese patients undergoing isolated valve surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 2011;91: 406-10.
21. Salis S, Mazzanti VV, Merli G, Salvi L, Tedesco CC, Veglia F et al. Cardiopulmonary bypass duration is an independent predictor of morbidity and mortality after cardiac surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2008; 22:814-22.