Background: In this study, we compared our experience about early and midterm follow-up outcomes for right anterolateral minithoracotomy (RAMT) vs full sternotomy (FS) in surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) among adolescents with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV). Methods: Patients were retrospectively enrolled from January 2008 to December 2017. Inclusion criteria were patients with BAV who had to undergo to AVR. They were divided in two groups: RAMT and FS. The choice of RAMT was based on individual surgeon’s preferences or when expressly requested by patient that was informed of nonconventional approach. Results: We enrolled 61 patients, 23 in RAMT group and 38 in FS group. The mean age was 15.6 ± 1.7 years for RAMT group and 16.1 ± 1.5 years for FS group (P =.23). The RAMT group had a higher prevalence of female gender (P =.04). The patients in the RAMT group had longer cardiopulmonary bypass (115.2 ± 18.5 vs 102.2 ± 16.5 min; P =.006) and cross-clamp time (78.6 ± 18.1 vs 74.3 ± 15.2 min; P =.01). No patients required intraoperative conversion to FS. No differences were found in ventilation times, postoperative intensive care unit (ICU), and hospital length of stay for both groups. Follow-up echocardiograms were available for all patients at median of 5.2 years (range 0.5-9.6 years, median 5.4 years for RAMT and 5.1 for FS) and no patient required reoperation for aortic prosthesis malfunction. Conclusions: Our study shows that RAMT is safe and effective as FS. Although the RAMT operation takes slightly more operation time, it is not associated with major adverse effects.

Right thoracotomy for aortic valve replacement in the adolescents with bicuspid aortic valve

Giordano, Raffaele
;
Comentale, Giuseppe;Di Tommaso, Luigi;Iannelli, Gabriele;Palma, Gaetano
2019

Abstract

Background: In this study, we compared our experience about early and midterm follow-up outcomes for right anterolateral minithoracotomy (RAMT) vs full sternotomy (FS) in surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) among adolescents with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV). Methods: Patients were retrospectively enrolled from January 2008 to December 2017. Inclusion criteria were patients with BAV who had to undergo to AVR. They were divided in two groups: RAMT and FS. The choice of RAMT was based on individual surgeon’s preferences or when expressly requested by patient that was informed of nonconventional approach. Results: We enrolled 61 patients, 23 in RAMT group and 38 in FS group. The mean age was 15.6 ± 1.7 years for RAMT group and 16.1 ± 1.5 years for FS group (P =.23). The RAMT group had a higher prevalence of female gender (P =.04). The patients in the RAMT group had longer cardiopulmonary bypass (115.2 ± 18.5 vs 102.2 ± 16.5 min; P =.006) and cross-clamp time (78.6 ± 18.1 vs 74.3 ± 15.2 min; P =.01). No patients required intraoperative conversion to FS. No differences were found in ventilation times, postoperative intensive care unit (ICU), and hospital length of stay for both groups. Follow-up echocardiograms were available for all patients at median of 5.2 years (range 0.5-9.6 years, median 5.4 years for RAMT and 5.1 for FS) and no patient required reoperation for aortic prosthesis malfunction. Conclusions: Our study shows that RAMT is safe and effective as FS. Although the RAMT operation takes slightly more operation time, it is not associated with major adverse effects.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
47 RAMT CHD.pdf

solo utenti autorizzati

Tipologia: Documento in Post-print
Licenza: Accesso privato/ristretto
Dimensione 443.09 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
443.09 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11588/745199
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 1
social impact