Li, Zhuo

Background— Severe primary (degenerative) mitral regurgitation (MR) is repaired with durable results when simple single-scallop disease is addressed. The midterm quality outcomes of minimally invasive repair for complex disease are unknown, however. Methods and Results— From January 2008 to January 2015, 487 patients (56±11 years, 360 men, ejection fraction 65±6%, 98.8% complete follow-up) underwent robotic mitral valve repair for severe nonischemic degenerative MR. Simple pathology was addressed in 289 of 487 (59%) patients, and complex repair (all others) was performed in 198 of 487 (41%). Four patients died during follow-up with a 5-year survival rate 99.5% (99.4% simple; 99.5% complex; hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.05–4.59); and New York Heart Association functional class I/II was documented in 97.9% (477/487). Eight patients had recurrence of moderate-to-severe MR (4 simple, 4 complex), with a 5-year freedom from MR of 94.6% (96.2% simple; 92.7%, complex; P =0.67; hazard ratio, 1.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.34–5.43). Seven patients (2 simple, 5 complex), underwent mitral reoperation, with a 5-year freedom from reoperation of 97.7% (99.1% simple; 95.7% complex; P =0.13; hazard ratio, 3.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.65–17.32). Conclusions— At a large tertiary care referral center, midterm quality outcomes after robotic correction of degenerative MR are excellent, with very high survival, infrequent complications, and a low likelihood of MR recurrence, regardless of mitral valve repair complexity. Awareness of these improvements in outcome is important to inform contemporary decisions regarding high-quality alternatives to conventional and percutaneous mitral repair.

Objective: To compare the safety and effectiveness of video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) versus conventional median sternotomy (open) in the repair of secundum atrial septal defect (ASD) or patent foramen ovale (PFO). Design: Among 415 consecutive patients undergoing open or VATS ASD/PFO closure between 1993 and October 2012, 153 patients were compared using 2:1 frequency matching (n = 102 open vs 51 VATS). Matching variables include age, gender, body surface area, past medical history of neurologic events, and need of patch closure. Median age was 43 years (3-71 years), and 67% were female. Results: There were no early deaths in either group. There were no conversions to open sternotomy. Although mean cross-clamp time (14.5 ± 7.6 vs 26.3 ± 13.2 minutes, P < .001) and bypass time (31.7 ± 13.8 vs 60.9 ± 20.9 minutes, P < .001) were longer in the VATS group, patients who underwent VATS had shorter postoperative ventilation time (7.5 ± 6.4 vs 4.4 ± 2.8 hours, P = .03) with 62.7% extubated in the operating room, along with shorter intensive care unit stay (26.7 ± 10.8 vs 19.1 ± 9.9 hours, P < .001) and hospital stay (5.2 ± 1.9 vs 3.5 ± 0.9 days, P < .001). At early follow-up (mean 1.5 years, maximum 4.2 years), there was no difference in need for reintervention. Of the 27 patients who underwent VATS ASD/PFO closure for a neurologic event, none had a recurrence. Conclusion: The use of VATS provides a safe, equally effective alternative to conventional sternotomy for ASD/PFO closure, using a less invasive approach.

Background— Cardiac manifestations of Marfan syndrome include aortic root dilation and mitral valve prolapse (MVP). Only scant data exist describing MVP in patients with Marfan syndrome undergoing aortic root replacement. Methods and Results— We retrospectively analyzed data from 166 MFS patients with MVP who were enrolled in a prospective multicenter registry of patients who underwent aortic root aneurysm repair. Of these 166 patients, 9% had mitral regurgitation (MR) grade >2, and 10% had MR grade 2. The severity of MVP and MR was evaluated by echocardiography preoperatively and ≤3 years postoperatively. Forty-one patients (25%) underwent composite graft aortic valve replacement, and 125 patients (75%) underwent aortic valve–sparing procedures; both groups had similar prevalences of MR grade >2 ( P =0.7). Thirty-three patients (20%) underwent concomitant mitral valve (MV) intervention (repair, n=29; replacement, n=4), including all 15 patients with MR grade >2. Only 1 patient required MV reintervention during follow-up (mean clinical follow-up, 31±10 months). Echocardiography performed 21±13 months postoperatively revealed MR >2 in only 3 patients (2%). One early death and 2 late deaths occurred. Conclusions— Although the majority of patients with Marfan syndrome who undergo elective aortic root replacement have MVP, only 20% have concomitant MV procedures. These concomitant procedures do not seem to increase operative risk. In patients with MR grade ≤2 who do not undergo a concomitant MV procedure, the short-term incidence of progressive MR is low; however, more follow-up is needed to determine whether patients with MVP and MR grade ≤2 would benefit from prophylactic MV intervention.

Background— Use of the left internal mammary artery (LIMA) in multivessel coronary artery disease improves survival after coronary artery bypass graft surgery; however, the survival benefit of multiple arterial (MultArt) grafts is debated. Methods and Results— We reviewed 8622 Mayo Clinic patients who had isolated primary coronary artery bypass graft surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease from 1993 to 2009. Patients were stratified by number of arterial grafts into the LIMA plus saphenous veins (LIMA/SV) group (n=7435) or the MultArt group (n=1187). Propensity score analysis matched 1153 patients. Operative mortality was 0.8% (n=10) in the MultArt and 2.1% (n=154) in the LIMA/SV ( P =0.005) group, which was not statistically different ( P =0.996) in multivariate analysis or the propensity-matched analysis ( P =0.818). Late survival was greater for MultArt versus LIMA/SV (10- and 15-year survival rates were 84% and 71% versus 61% and 36%, respectively [ P <0.001], in unmatched groups and 83% and 70% versus 80% and 60%, respectively [ P =0.0025], in matched groups). MultArt subgroups with bilateral internal mammary artery/SV (n=589) and bilateral internal mammary artery only (n=271) had improved 15-year survival (86% and 76%; 82% and 75% at 10 and 15 years [ P <0.001]), and patients with bilateral internal mammary artery/radial artery (n=147) and LIMA/radial artery (n=169) had greater 10-year survival (84% and 78%; P <0.001) versus LIMA/SV. In multivariate analysis, MultArt grafts remained a strong independent predictor of survival (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.66–0.94; P =0.007). Conclusions— In patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass graft surgery with LIMA to left anterior descending artery, arterial grafting of the non–left anterior descending vessels conferred a survival advantage at 15 years compared with SV grafting. It is still unproven whether these results apply to higher-risk subgroups of patients.

Objective To determine the hemodynamic effect of an off-pump Apicoaortic valved graft (AAVG) implantation, we performed a quantitative coronary flow analysis in a swine model of severe aortic stenosis. Methods In 10 swine, cardiac output, coronary flow, right common carotid artery flow, and internal mammary artery flow were measured along with left and right ventricular pressures and aortic and pulmonary artery pressures. A novel AAVG was implanted off-pump on the left ventricular (LV) apex using a specially designed implantation tool and anastomosed to the descending thoracic aorta. Aortic flow was measured proximally and distally of the AAVG-to-descending thoracic aorta anastomosis. After AAVG implantation, epicardial echo confirmed occlusion of the LV outflow tract by a valvuloplasty balloon. Baseline simultaneous measurements of all parameters were repeated after AAVG implantation and intravenous Dobutamine administration. Results The AAVG was implanted without any blood loss. After AAVG implantation and LV outflow tract occlusion, the aortic flow proximal to the AAVG-to-descending thoracic aorta anastomosis changed from antegrade (1508 ± 435 mL/min) to retrograde (–529 ± 241 mL/min, P < 0.001). All other measured parameters remained unchanged compared with baseline. After intravenous Dobutamine administration, LV pressure increased from 88 ± 20 to 184 ± 36 mm Hg (+209%, P < 0.0001) and coronary flow increased from 75 ± 34 to 193 ± 90 mL/min (+257%, P = 0.001). Conclusions The off-pump implantation of an AAVG is bloodless, safe, reproducible and has no negative impact on coronary flow and hemodynamics. In addition, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first study where blood flow in all coronary arteries was measured simultaneously during an AAVG implantation.

Background— Few data exist on long-term outcomes of elderly patients after aortic valve replacement. We evaluated latest follow-up information for patients ≥70 years of age after aortic valve replacement. Methods and Results— Late overall survival of 2890 consecutive patients ≥70 years of age who underwent aortic valve replacement between January 1993 and December 2007 was reviewed retrospectively, analyzed, and stratified by preoperative and intraoperative variables. Observed 5-, 10-, and 15-year late postoperative survival was lower than generally expected (68%, 34%, and 8% versus 70%, 42%, and 20%, respectively; P <0.001). Independent predictors of late death included older age, renal failure, diabetes mellitus, stroke, myocardial infarction, immunosuppression, prior coronary artery bypass grafting, implanted pacemaker, lower ejection fraction, hypertension, and New York Heart Association class III or IV. After stratification by age–comorbidity risk score, 10-year survival for the lowest-risk group (n=946 [33%]) was similar to expected survival (55% versus 55%; P =0.50), but for the highest-risk group (n=564 [20%]), survival was significantly lower than expected (9% versus 26%; P <0.001). For 229 pairs of propensity-matched patients with mechanical or biological prostheses, survival was not significantly different (67%, 40%, and 19% versus 71%, 45%, and 7% at 5, 10, and 15 years, respectively; P =0.81). Structural deterioration of bioprostheses occurred in 64 patients (2.4%). Conclusions— Survival of elderly patients after aortic valve replacement is influenced by age and preoperative comorbidities; 33% at lowest risk had overall survival similar to that of an age- and sex-matched general population. There was no sufficient evidence that valve type affected survival. Structural deterioration of aortic bioprostheses was rare.