Author:
Abd Al Jawad Mohammed,Mourad Faisal
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Minimally invasive aortic surgery is growing in popularity among surgeons. Although many clinical reports have proven both the safety and efficacy from a surgical point of view, there are few data regarding its impact on patients’ quality of life and whether there is a difference between ministernotomy and minithoracotomy from the patient perspective.
Methods
This prospective, questionnaire-based, nonrandomized study included 189 patients who underwent aortic valve replacement via a minimally invasive incision between May 2014 and December 2020 and completed at least 1 year of follow-up. The study uses the RAND SF 36-Item Health Survey 1.0 to assess and compare health-related quality of life between ministernotomy and minithoracotomy.
Results
There was a statistically significant improvement in the minithoracotomy group with regard to physical functioning, role limitation due to a physical problem, and social functioning (79.69 ± 20.72, 75.28 ± 26.52, 87.91 ± 16.98) compared to the ministernotomy group (70.31 ± 22.88, 58.59 ± 31.17, 66.15 ± 27.32) with p values (0.0036, 0.0001, < 0.0001), respectively.
Conclusions
Both minimally invasive aortic valve incisions positively impacted patient quality of life. The minithoracotomy incision showed significant improvements in physical capacity and successful patient re-engagement in daily physical and social activities. This, in turn, positively improved their general health status compared to the 1-year preoperative status.
Trial registration: This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee (REC) at the Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, under the number code (FWA 000017585, FAMSU R 91 /2021).
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,General Medicine,Surgery,Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
Reference17 articles.
1. Nguyen TC, Terwelp MD, Thourani VH, Zhao Y, Ganim N, Hoffmann C, et al. Clinical trends in surgical, minimally invasive and transcatheter aortic valve replacement†. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017;51(6):1086–92.
2. Leidl R, Sintonen H, Abbühl B, Hoffmann C, von der Schulenburg J-M, König H-H. Do physicians accept quality of life and utility measurement? Eur J Health Econ (HEPAC). 2001;2(4):170–5.
3. Bergner M. Quality of life, health status, and clinical research. Med Care. 1989;27(3 Suppl):S148–56. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-198903001-00012.
4. -Item Short Form Survey from the RAND Medical Outcomes Study (Internet). RAND Corporation. (cited 2022 July 6). https://www.rand.org/health-care/surveys_tools/mos/36-item-short-form.html
5. -Item Short form survey instrument (SF-36) (Internet). RAND Corporation. (cited 2022 July 6). https://www.rand.org/health-care/surveys_tools/mos/36-item-short-form/survey-instrument.html.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献