Is it safe to move away from a full sternotomy for aortic valve replacement?

Abstract

Background Minimally invasive surgical approaches have gained popularity among patients and surgeons. The aim of this project was to assess the safety of initiating aortic valve replacement via an anterior right thoracotomy program. Methods Between May 2015 and May 2019, data of all isolated primary aortic valve replacements were extracted retrospectively from our prospectively collected database and categorized into conventional median sternotomy, hemisternotomy, and anterior right thoracotomy cases. In total, 661 patients underwent isolated primary aortic valve replacement, of whom 429 (65%) had a median sternotomy, 126 (19%) had a hemisternotomy, and 106 (16%) had an anterior right thoracotomy. Preoperative characteristics were similar in each of the three groups. Statistical testing of the surgical groups was undertaken using the chi-square test for categorical variables and one-way analysis of variance with Tukey post-hoc pairwise tests (where appropriate) for continuous variables, to identify differences between pairs of data. Results Cardiopulmonary bypass and crossclamp times were significantly longer in the anterior right thoracotomy group compared to the hemisternotomy and median sternotomy groups ( p < 0.001). Blood loss was significantly less and hospital stay significantly shorter in the hemisternotomy group compared to median sternotomy group but not the anterior right thoracotomy group. Mortality, stroke, renal, gastrointestinal and respiratory complications showed no statistical differences. Conclusion Surgical aortic valve replacement had a very low mortality and morbidity in our experience, and it is safe to start a minimal access program for aortic valve replacement.