336
Views
6
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

J-shaped versus median sternotomy for aortic valve replacement with minimal extracorporeal circuit

, , , , , & show all
Pages 379-384 | Received 02 May 2011, Accepted 09 Jul 2011, Published online: 19 Aug 2011
 

Abstract

Objectives. Minimal access Aortic Valve Replacement (AVR) has been demonstrated to have beneficial effects over median sternotomy. Minimal extracorporeal circulation (MECC) has been shown to have less deleterious effects than conventional cardiopulmonary bypass. We describe for the first time AVR via upper J-shaped partial sternotomy compared to median sternotomy using MECC. Methods. Prospectively collected pre-operative, intra-operative, post-operative and follow-up data from 104 consecutive patients who underwent minimal access AVR were compared to 72 consecutive patients undergoing median sternotomy using MECC during the same period (January 2007 to December 2009). Results. No significant differences were found in patient's characteristics or intra-operative data with the exception of pre-existing pulmonary disease. The mean cardiopulmonary bypass (86 ± 18 min vs. 78 ± 15 min, p = 0.0079) and cross-clamp times (65 ± 13 min vs. 59 ± 12 min, p = 0.0013) were significantly shorter in the median sternotomy group. Mediastinal blood loss (397 ± 257 ml vs. 614 ± 339 ml, p < 0.0001) and ventilation time (8 ± 6.9 h vs. 11 ± 16.5 h, p = 0.0054) were significantly less in the minimal access group. No differences were seen in transfusion requirements, inotropic support, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, total hospital stay, post-operative haemoglobin drop, major events or mortality. Quality of life scores after discharge demonstrated less pain with a quicker recovery and return to daily activities in patients receiving J-shaped sternotomy. Conclusions. Minimal access AVR using MECC is feasible and provides excellent clinical results. Less pain and quicker recovery was experienced among patients in this group.

Declaration of interest: The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.