ISMICS Home  |  Past & Future Meetings
Countdown to ISMICS : -116 Days  
International Society For Minimally Invasive Cardiothoracic Surgery

Back to 2020 Abstracts


Comparison Of Totally Endoscopic Robot Assisted Surgery And Minimally Invasive Surgery Via Right Thoracotomy In Mitral Valve Repair
Ryuta Seguchi
Newheart Watanabe Institute, Tokyo, Japan

Background: More than a decade has passed since the first Totally Endoscopic Robot-Assisted Mitral Valve Repair (TERMVR) was performed. Robot-Assisted surgical technique has developed and prevailed. Obviously, Totally Endoscopic Robot-Assisted Cardiac Surgery provides small wound and less pain compared to conventional surgery. However, some clinician questions its quality and safety in mitral valve surgery. Therefore, we performed a retrospective review and statistical analysis to examine whether TERMVR provides satisfying outcomes compared to conventional Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Repair via Right Thoracotomy (MIMVR). Methods: From May 2014 to September 2019, 590 cases of repair for degenerative mitral valve regurgitation were performed in a single center. 353 cases were TERMVR and 237 cases were MIMVR. Outcomes of TERMVR and MIMVR were compared. Results: There were no difference in operation time (TERMVR 185±43 min vs MIMVR 190±41 min, p=0.15). Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time was significantly longer in TERMVR (TERMVR 126±25 min vs MIMVR 113±30 min, p<0.03). Aortic cross clump time was significantly shorter in TERMVR (TERMVR 69±16 min vs MIMVR 75±23 min, p<0.03). Blood loss was significantly less in TERMVR (TERMVR 52±138 ml vs MIMVR 297±393ml, p<0.03). Percentage of transfusions required was significantly lower in TERMVR (TERMVR 7.6% vs MIMVR 27.8%, p<0.03). Reoperation for bleeding was required in 0.8% of TERMVR and 1.6% of MIMVR(p=0.35). Second cross clump for additional repair was required in 1.4% of TERMVR and 2.5% of MIMVR (p=0.35). Mortality was 0% in TERMVR and 0.4% in MIMVR(p=0.22). Stroke occurred in 1.1% of TERMVR and 0.4% of MIMVR (p=0.36). Freedom from reoperation within one year was 99.5% in TERMVR and 98.5% in MIMVR(p=0.94). Conclusions: Expect for CPB time, TERMVR showed better or equivalent outcomes compared to MIMVR. Especially, transfusion avoidance rate was spectacular in TERMVR. Totally Endoscopic Robot-Assisted Mitral Valve Repair provides safe and satisfying outcomes to patients while retaining the quality of valve repair.


Back to 2020 Abstracts
Poland
Poland
Poland
Poland
By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy.  Got it