Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Open vs. Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery: Surgical Technique, Indications and Results

  • Published:
Cardiovascular Engineering and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Minimally invasive procedures are the standard approach in many centres but are still under debate in regards of inferiority compared to conventional mitral valve surgery through a median sternotomy. The aim of this review was to summarize the current literature comparing minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIVS) and conventional mitral valve surgery. In this review of the current literature, we summarize our findings from a recent meta-analysis and add information from papers that were published afterwards. There were no differences between patients treated minimally invasive or through a conventional sternotomy approach in regards of perioperative stroke rate and mortality. Procedural time, cardio-pulmonary-bypass time and cross-clamp time were longer in the MIVS group. In contrast, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay and length of in hospital stay were significantly reduced in this group. Need for blood transfusion was lower in the MIVS group. Other outcomes like i.e., the rate of rethoracotomies or renal failure didn’t differ between the groups. Repair rates and long-term freedom from recurrence of mitral regurgitation and reoperation are similar. Newer publications underline these findings. The current literature shows that MIVS and conventional mitral valve surgery show a similar perioperative outcome. Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery is favourable with regards to ICU stay, in hospital stay as well as need for blood transfusion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Antonic, M., and B. Gersak. Renal function after port access and median sternotomy mitral valve surgery. Heart Surg. Forum. 10:E401–E407, 2007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Cao, C., S. Gupta, D. Chandrakumar, T. A. Nienaber, P. Indraratna, S. C. Ang, K. Phan, and T. D. Yan. A meta-analysis of minimally invasive versus conventional mitral valve repair for patients with degenerative mitral disease. Ann. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2:693–703, 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Carabello, B. A. The current therapy for mitral regurgitation. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 52:319–326, 2008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chaney, M. A., R. A. Durazo-Arvizu, E. M. Fluder, K. J. Sawicki, M. P. Nikolov, B. P. Blakeman, and M. Bakhos. Port-access minimally invasive cardiac surgery increases surgical complexity, increases operating room time, and facilitates early postoperative hospital discharge. Anesthesiology 92:1637–1645, 2000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cheng, D. C. H., J. Martin, A. Lal, A. Diegeler, T. A. Folliguet, L. W. Nifong, P. Perier, E. Raanani, J. M. Smith, J. Seeburger, and V. Falk. Minimally invasive versus conventional open mitral valve surgery: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Innovations (Phila). 6:84–103, 2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chitwood, W. R., C. L. Wixon, J. R. Elbeery, J. F. Moran, W. H. H. Chapman, and R. M. Lust. Video-assisted minimally invasive mitral valve surgery. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 114:773–780, 1997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Cosgrove, III, D. M., J. F. Sabik, and J. L. Navia. Minimally invasive valve operations. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 65:1535–1539, 1998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. de Vaumas, C., I. Philip, G. Daccache, J.-P. Depoix, J.-B. Lecharny, D. Enguerand, and J. M. Desmonts. Comparison of minithoracotomy and conventional sternotomy approaches for valve surgery. J. Cardiothorac. Vasc. Anesth. 17:325–328, 2003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ding, C., D. M. Jiang, K. Y. Tao, Q. J. Duan, J. Li, M. J. Kong, Z. H. Shen, and A. Q. Dong. Anterolateral minithoracotomy versus median sternotomy for mitral valve disease: a meta-analysis. J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci B. 15:522–532, 2014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dogan, S., T. Aybek, P. S. Risteski, F. Detho, A. Rapp, G. Wimmer-Greinecker, and A. Moritz. Minimally invasive port access versus conventional mitral valve surgery: prospective randomized Study. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 79:492–498, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. El-Fiky, M. M., T. El-Sayegh, A. S. El-Beishry, M. A. Aziz, H. A. Enein, S. Waheid, and I. A. Sallam. Limited right anterolateral thoracotomy for mitral valve surgery. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 17:710–713, 2000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Enriquez-Sarano, M., C. W. Akins, and A. Vahanian. Mitral regurgitation. Lancet 373:1382–1394, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Felger, J. E., W. R. Chitwood, L. W. Nifong, and D. Holbert. Evolution of mitral valve surgery: toward a totally endoscopic approach. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 72:1203–1208, 2001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Folliguet, T., F. Vanhuyse, X. Constantino, M. Realli, and F. Laborde. Mitral valve repair robotic versus sternotomy. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 29:362–366, 2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Galloway, A. C., C. F. Schwartz, G. H. Ribakove, G. A. Crooke, G. Gogoladze, P. Ursomanno, M. Mirabella, A. T. Culliford, and E. A. Grossi. A decade of minimally invasive mitral repair: long-term outcomes. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 88:1180–1184, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Gammie, J. S., Y. Zhao, E. D. Peterson, S. M. O’Brien, J. S. Rankin, and B. P. Griffith. Less-invasive mitral valve operations: trends and outcomes from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons adult cardiac surgery database. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 90:1401–1408, 2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gersak, B., M. Sostaric, J. M. Kalisnik, and R. Blumauer. The preferable use of port access surgical technique for right and left atrial procedures. Heart Surg. Forum. 8:E354–E363, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Glower, D. D., K. P. Landolfo, F. Clements, N. P. Debruijn, M. Stafford-Smith, P. K. Smith, and F. Duhaylongsod. Mitral valve operation via Port Access versus median sternotomy. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 14(Suppl):143–147, 1998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Goldstone, A. B., P. Atluri, W. Y. Szeto, A. Trubelja, J. L. Howard, J. W. MacArthur, Jr, C. Newcomb, J. P. Donnelly, D. M. Kobrin, M. A. Sheridan, C. Powers, R. C. Gorman, J. H. Gorman, 3rd, A. Pochettino, J. E. Bavaria, M. A. Acker, W. C. Hargrove, 3rd, and Y. J. Woo. Minimally invasive approach provides at least equivalent results for surgical correction of mitral regurgitation: a propensity-matched comparison. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 145:748–756, 2013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Grossi, E. A., A. LaPietra, G. H. Ribakove, J. Delianides, R. Esposito, A. T. Culliford, C. C. Derivaux, R. M. Applebaum, I. Kronzon, B. M. Steinberg, F. G. Baumann, A. C. Galloway, and S. B. Colvin. Minimally invasive versus sternotomy approaches for mitral reconstruction: comparison of intermediate-term results. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 121:708–713, 2001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Grossi, E. A., A. C. Galloway, G. H. Ribakove, P. K. Zakow, C. C. Derivaux, F. G. Baumann, D. Schwesinger, and S. B. Colvin. Impact of minimally invasive valvular heart surgery: a case-control study. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 71:807–810, 2001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Grossi, E. A., D. F. Loulmet, C. F. Schwartz, B. Solomon, S. L. Dellis, A. T. Culliford, E. Zias, and A. C. Galloway. Minimally invasive valve surgery with antegrade perfusion strategy is not associated with increased neurologic complications. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 92:1346–1350, 2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Holzhey, D. M., W. Shi, M. A. Borger, J. Seeburger, J. Garbade, B. Pfannmüller, and F. W. Mohr. Minimally invasive versus sternotomy approach for mitral valve surgery in patients greater than 70 years old: a propensity-matched comparison. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 91:401–405, 2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Iribarne, A., M. J. Russo, R. Easterwood, K. N. Hong, J. Yang, F. H. Cheema, C. R. Smith, and M. Argenziano. Minimally invasive versus sternotomy approach for mitral valve surgery: a propensity analysis. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 90:1471–1478, 2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Iribarne, A., R. Easterwood, M. J. Russo, Y. C. Wang, J. Yang, K. N. Hong, C. R. Smith, and M. Argenziano. A minimally invasive approach is more cost-effective than a traditional sternotomy approach for mitral valve surgery. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 142:1507–1514, 2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Iribarne, A., R. Easterwood, M. J. Russo, E. Y. Chan, C. R. Smith, and M. Argenziano. Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive versus traditional sternotomy mitral valve surgery in elderly patients. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 143:S86–S90, 2012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Jacobs, S., and S. H. Sündermann. Minimally invasive valve sparing mitral valve repair-the loop technique-how we do it. Ann. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2:818–824, 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Jokinen, J. J., M. J. Hippeläinen, O. A. Pitkänen, and J. E. K. Hartikainen. Mitral valve replacement versus repair: propensity-adjusted survival and quality-of-life analysis. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 84:451–458, 2007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kam, J. K., S. D. Cooray, and J. A. Smith. A cost-analysis study of robotic versus conventional mitral valve repair. Heart Lung Circ. 19:413–418, 2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Markar, S. R., U. Sadat, L. Edmonds, and S. K. Nair. Mitral valve repair versus replacement in the elderly population. J. Heart Valve Dis. 20:265–271, 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  31. McCreath, B. J., M. Swaminathan, J. V. Booth, B. Phillips-Bute, S. T. H. Chew, D. D. Glower, and M. Stafford-Smith. Mitral valve surgery and acute renal injury: port access versus median sternotomy. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 75:812–819, 2003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. McKnight, C. L. C., B. B. Davis, C. C. Wright, D. D. Blackhurst, and W. W. Bolton. Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery: smaller incisions, better outcomes? Am. Surg. 78:E370–E372, 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Mihaljevic, T., C. M. Jarrett, A. M. Gillinov, S. J. Williams, P. A. DeVilliers, W. J. Stewart, L. G. Svensson, J. F. Sabik, 3rd, and E. H. Blackstone. Robotic repair of posterior mitral valve prolapse versus conventional approaches: potential realized. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 141:72–74, 2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Mohr, F. W., V. Falk, A. Diegeler, T. Walther, J. A. M. von Son, and R. Autschbach. Minimally invasive port-access mitral valve surgery. J .Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 115:567–574, 1998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Nasso, G., R. Bonifazi, V. Romano, F. Bartolomucci, G. Rosano, F. Massari, K. Fattouch, G. Del Prete, G. Riccioni, M. Del Giglio, and G. Speziale. Three-year results of repaired barlow mitral valves via right minithoracotomy versus median sternotomy in a randomized trial. Cardiology 128:97–105, 2014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Neto, J. V., E. Melo, J. Fernandes, R. Gomes, C. Freitas, J. Machado, F. Martins, A. Barbosa, B. Oliveira, and C. Gondim. Mitral valve and atrial septal defect surgery: minimally invasive or sternotomy approach. Arq. Bras. Cardiol. 99:681–687, 2012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Nikolic, A., R. Huskic, L. Jovovic, B. Radomir, M. Cirkovic, and M. Bojic. Our experience with minimally invasive surgery. Cor Europaeum 8:57, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Raanani, E., D. Spiegelstein, L. Sternik, S. Reisman, Y. Moshkovitz, A. K. Smolinsky, and A. Shinfeld. Quality of mitral valve repair: median sternotomy versus port-access approach. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 140:86–90, 2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Reichenspurner, H., D. H. Boehm, H. Gulbins, C. Schulze, S. Wildhirt, A. Welz, C. Detter, and B. Reichart. Three-dimensional video and robot-assisted port-access mitral valve operation. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 69:1176–1181, 2000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ruttmann, E., G. Laufer, and L. C. Müller. Etablierung eines Programms für minimal invasive Mitraklappenoperationen an der Univ Klinik Innsbruck. Eur. Surg. 38:320–325, 2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Ryan, W. H., W. T. Brinkman, T. M. Dewey, M. J. Mack, S. L. Prince, and M. A. Herbert. Mitral valve surgery: comparison of outcomes in matched sternotomy and port access groups. J. Heart Valve Dis. 19:51–59, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Schneider, F., J. F. Onnasch, V. Falk, T. Walther, R. Autschbach, and F. W. Mohr. Cerebral microemboli during minimally invasive and conventional mitral valve operations. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 70:1094–1097, 2000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Speziale, G., G. Nasso, G. Esposito, M. Conte, E. Greco, K. Fattouch, F. Fiore, M. Del Giglio, R. Coppola, and L. Tavazzi. Results of mitral valve repair for Barlow disease (bileaflet prolapse) via right minithoracotomy versus conventional median sternotomy: a randomized trial. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 142:77–83, 2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Srivastava, A. K., S. K. Garg, and A. K. Ganjoo. Approach for primary mitral valve surgery: right anterolateral thoracotomy or median sternotomy. J. Heart Valve Dis. 7:370–375, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Stevens, L. M., E. Rodriguez, E. J. Lehr, L. C. Kindell, L. W. Nifong, T. B. Ferguson, and W. R. Chitwood, Jr. Impact of timing and surgical approach on outcomes after mitral valve regurgitation operations. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 93:1462–1468, 2012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Sündermann, S. H., J. Sromicki, H. Rodriguez Cetina Biefer, B. Seifert, T. Holubec, V. Falk, and S. Jacobs. Mitral valve surgery: right lateral minithoracotomy or sternotomy? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Thorac Cardiovasc. Surg. 2014; doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2014.01.046. [Epub ahead of print].

  47. Suri, R. M., H. V. Schaff, S. R. Meyer, and W. C. Hargrove. Thoracoscopic versus open mitral valve repair: a propensity score analysis of early outcomes. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 88:1185–1190, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Suri, R. M., R. M. Antiel, H. M. Burkhart, M. Huebner, Z. Li, D. T. Eton, T. Topilsky, M. E. Sarano, and H. V. Schaff. Quality of life after early mitral valve repair using conventional and robotic approaches. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 93:761–769, 2012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Vahanian, A., O. Alfieri, F. Andreotti, M. J. Antunes, G. Barón-Esquivias, H. Baumgartner, M. A. Borger, T. P. Carrel, M. De Bonis, A. Evangelista, V. Falk, B. Lung, P. Lancellotti, L. Pierard, S. Price, H. J. Schäfers, G. Schuler, J. Stepinska, K. Swedberg, J. Takkenberg, U. O. Von Oppell, S. Windecker, J. L. Zamorano, and M. Zembala. ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG); Joint Task Force on the Management of Valvular Heart Disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC); European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease (version 2012): the Joint Task Force on the Management of Valvular Heart Disease of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 42:S1–S44, 2012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Walther, T., V. Falk, S. Metz, A. Diegeler, R. Battellini, R. Autschbach, and F. W. Mohr. Pain and quality of life after minimally invasive versus conventional cardiac surgery. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 67:1643–1647, 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Wang, D., Q. Wang, X. Yang, Q. Wu, and Q. Li. Mitral valve replacement through a minimal right vertical infra-axillary thoracotomy versus standard median sternotomy. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 87:704–708, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Wei, L., J. Q. Shen, C. S. Wang, L. M. Xia, Z. H. Yang, H. Liu, J. S. Zhu, H. Luo, K. F. Guo, and K. J. Hu. Repair of posterior mitral valve prolapsed: comparative study of three different approaches. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 50:637–641, 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Woo, Y. J., and E. A. Nacke. Robotic minimally invasive mitral valve reconstruction yields less blood product transfusion and shorter length of stay. Surgery 140:263–267, 2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Yoo, J. S., J. B. Kim, S. H. Jung, S. J. Choo, C. H. Chung, and J. W. Lee. Echocardiographic assessment of mitral durability in the late period following mitral valve repair: minithoracotomy versus conventional sternotomy. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 147:1547–1552, 2014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosure

All authors declare no conflict of interest.

Statement of Human Studies

No human studies were carried out by the authors for this article.

Statement of Animal Studies

No animal studies were carried out by the authors for this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, Deutsches Herzzentrum Berlin (German Heart Institute Berlin), Augustenburgr Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany

    Simon H. Sündermann & Volkmar Falk

  2. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, Freiburg, Germany

    Martin Czerny

Authors
  1. Simon H. Sündermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martin Czerny
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Volkmar Falk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simon H. Sündermann.

Additional information

Associate Editor Ajit P. Yoganathan oversaw the review of this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sündermann, S.H., Czerny, M. & Falk, V. Open vs. Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery: Surgical Technique, Indications and Results. Cardiovasc Eng Tech 6, 160–166 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13239-015-0210-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13239-015-0210-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation