Kiyama H, Imazeki T, Irie Y, Katayama Y, Murai N, Sato Y, Hata I, Gon S
Department of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Koshigaya Hospital, Dokkyo University School of Medicine, Saitama, Japan.
Kyobu Geka. 1999 Jul;52(7):519-24; discussion 525-7.
The median sternotomy has been accepted as the most common approach to the heart, because this approach is easily opened and closed, and easy access to the entire heart is possible. Following the pioneering work by Cosgrove and colleagues of using a parasternal incision for aortic and mitral valve operations, several reports suggested that modified minimal access procedures are likely to be associated with reduced postoperative discomfort and faster recovery. Since July 1997, we have used an upper partial sternotomy and a limited skin incision for isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR) at our hospital. To demonstrate the benefits of this approach, we compared 14 AVR operations using our minimal access incision (group M) with 19 patients undergoing isolated AVR using a conventional sternotomy (group F). In the minimal access group of patients, a small skin incision was made from the second intercostal space to the fourth rib. The pectralis major and intercostal muscle was freed from the sternum, and then a transverse half sternotomy was made in the fourth intercostal space using a striker without injury to the right internal mammary artery. A median partial sternotomy from the supersternal notch to the level of the fourth intercostal space. Cardiopulmonary bypass was connected through the same access site to avoid cannulation of both groins. Conversion to median sternotomy was not necessary in any patient including reexploration for postoperative bleeding. There was no operative mortality, stroke, aortic dissection and perivalvular leaks due to technical factors. In group F, wound infection occurred in 1 patient. One patient in group M required reoperation to control postoperative bleeding. Although mean duration of operation, cardiopulmonary bypass, and cross clamp time in group M was not prolonged, the initiation of cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic crossclamp was delayed by difficulties of cannulations. The distance between the transverse sternotomy (lower edge of divided sternum) and the midpoint of aortic valve annulus was correlated with mean duration of cardiopulmonary bypass and cross clamp time. Our experience demonstrates that isolated AVR through an upper partial sternotomy allows the same quality operations as the full sternotomy, although more clinical experience is required to clarify the benefits of this approach. Excellent exposure of the aortic valve through a partial sternotomy may be attained, if an adequate approach can be selected by the position of aortic valve.
正中胸骨切开术已被公认为是最常用的心脏手术入路,因为这种入路易于打开和关闭,并且能够方便地显露整个心脏。在科斯格罗夫及其同事开创了采用胸骨旁切口进行主动脉瓣和二尖瓣手术的先河之后,有几份报告指出,改良的微创术式可能会减少术后不适并加快恢复。自1997年7月以来,我院采用上半部分胸骨切开术和有限的皮肤切口进行单纯主动脉瓣置换术(AVR)。为了证明这种方法的优势,我们将14例采用微创切口进行AVR手术的患者(M组)与19例采用传统胸骨切开术进行单纯AVR的患者(F组)进行了比较。在微创组患者中,在第二肋间至第四肋处做一个小皮肤切口。将胸大肌和肋间肌从胸骨上松解下来,然后在第四肋间使用骨膜剥离器做一个横向半胸骨切开术,同时避免损伤右乳内动脉。从胸骨上切迹至第四肋间水平做一个正中部分胸骨切开术。通过相同的入路部位连接体外循环,以避免双侧腹股沟插管。包括因术后出血再次探查在内,所有患者均无需转为正中胸骨切开术。未发生因技术因素导致的手术死亡、中风、主动脉夹层和瓣周漏。F组有1例发生伤口感染。M组有1例患者需要再次手术以控制术后出血。虽然M组的平均手术时间、体外循环时间和主动脉阻断时间并未延长,但由于插管困难,体外循环和主动脉阻断的启动延迟。横向胸骨切开术(劈开胸骨的下缘)与主动脉瓣环中点之间的距离与平均体外循环时间和主动脉阻断时间相关。我们的经验表明,通过上半部分胸骨切开术进行单纯AVR能够获得与全胸骨切开术相同质量的手术效果,不过需要更多的临床经验来阐明这种方法的优势。如果能够根据主动脉瓣的位置选择合适的入路,通过部分胸骨切开术可以很好地显露主动脉瓣。