Video-assisted thoracic surgical technique versus conventional surgical technique for mitral valve replacement: A case control study

Chen Haiyu; Weng Guoxing; Bao Jiayin; Xie Qi; Chen Zhiqun; Wang Huan; Xiao Rongdong

Return

Video-assisted thoracic surgical technique versus conventional surgical technique for mitral valve replacement: A case control study

VernacularTitle:电视胸腔镜辅助下二尖瓣置换术与常规手术的病例对照研究
Author: CHEN Haiyu ¹ ; WENG Guoxing ¹ ; BAO Jiayin ¹ ; XIE Qi ¹ ; CHEN Zhiqun ¹ ; WANG Huan ¹ ; XIAO Rongdong ¹
Author Information

1. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, 350001, P.R.China
Publication Type:Journal Article
Keywords: Mitral valve replacement; video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery; cardiac surgery
From: Chinese Journal of Clinical Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 2017;24(9):683-686
CountryChina
Language:Chinese
Abstract: Objective To compare video-assisted thoracic surgical technique (VATS) and conventional surgical technique (CSM) in mitral valve replacement (MVR). Methods We retrospectively analyzed clinical data of 93 patients in our hospital with mitral valve replacement between January 2010 and January 2015. The patients were divided into two groups including a VATS group and a CSM group.There were 43 patients with 25 males and 18 females at age of 57.43±5.65 years in the VATS group, and 50 patients with 27 males and 23 females at age of 56.40±6.32 years in the CSM group.The clinical outcomes of the two groups were compared. Results There was no mortality. Echocardiography was normal in both groups during 1-year follow-up. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the operative time, aortic clamping time, cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time, or ventilation time. As compared with the CSM group, the patients in the VATS group had a significantly lower complication rate, shorter chest incision length (5.23±1.36 cm vs. 18.21±3.89 cm), less blood transfusion (1.75±0.25 U vs. 3.15±1.50 U), less chest drainage (202.34±12.12 ml vs. 412.32±21.56 ml) and lower pain score (1.26±0.86 vs. 3.01±1.13), shorter time of postoperative hospital stay (8.20±2.36 d vs. 12.10±3.26 d). Conclusion MVR under VATS is not only technically feasible, but also with excellent clinical results.