Santana Orlando, Xydas Steve, Williams Roy F, LaPietra Angelo, Mawad Maurice, Wigley Jason C, Beohar Nirat, Mihos Christos G
The Columbia University Division of Cardiology, Mount Sinai Medical Center, Miami Beach, Florida, USA.
The Division of Cardiac Surgery, Mount Sinai Medical Center, Miami Beach, Florida, USA.
J Thorac Dis. 2017 Jun;9(Suppl 7):S575-S581. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2017.04.40.
In patients with prior cardiac surgery requiring re-operative coronary and valve surgery, a hybrid approach of percutaneous coronary intervention followed by minimally invasive valve surgery (PCI + MIVS) may be an alternative to the standard median sternotomy coronary artery bypass and valve surgery (CABG + valve).
The outcomes of patients with prior cardiac surgery, presenting with coronary artery and valvular disease, who underwent PCI + MIVS (N=39) were retrospectively compared with those who underwent CABG + valve (N=28) via a repeat median sternotomy, between February 2009 and April 2014.
The mean age for the PCI + MIVS versus CABG + valve group was 75±9 and 72±11 years (P=0.54), respectively. The baseline characteristics were similar between groups, with the exception of a greater prevalence of 1-vessel coronary artery disease and clopidogrel or dual antiplatelet therapy at the time of surgery in the PCI + MIVS group, and more 3-vessel coronary artery disease in those undergoing CABG + valve surgery. The PCI + MIVS approach was associated with a decreased aortic cross-clamp (94 . 131 minutes, P=0.001) and cardiopulmonary bypass (128 . 190 minutes, P<0.001) times, fewer intraoperative packed red blood transfusions (1.3 . 3.8 units, P=0.001), shorter intensive care unit length of stay (41 . 71 hours, P<0.001), and decreased incidence of prolonged mechanical ventilation (12.8% . 35.7%, P=0.03), re-intubation (2.6% . 17.9%, P=0.04), when compared with CABG + valve. The thirty-day and two-year mortality were similar, being 7.7% . 7.1% (P=0.66), and 12.8% . 10.7% (P=0.55), in the PCI + MIVS . CABG + valve group, respectively.
Hybrid PCI + MIVS in patients with prior cardiac surgery is associated with shorter operative times and intensive care unit length of stay, less need for intraoperative blood cell transfusions, decreased use of mechanical ventilation, and similar short-term and follow-up survival, when compared with CABG + valve surgery via median sternotomy. Randomized trials and multicenter registries are needed to further evaluate this approach.
对于既往接受过心脏手术且需要再次进行冠状动脉和瓣膜手术的患者,经皮冠状动脉介入治疗后行微创瓣膜手术(PCI + MIVS)的混合方法可能是标准正中开胸冠状动脉旁路移植术和瓣膜手术(CABG + 瓣膜手术)的一种替代方案。
回顾性比较2009年2月至2014年4月期间,既往接受过心脏手术、患有冠状动脉和瓣膜疾病且接受PCI + MIVS(n = 39)的患者与经正中开胸再次接受CABG + 瓣膜手术(n = 28)的患者的结局。
PCI + MIVS组与CABG + 瓣膜组的平均年龄分别为75±9岁和72±11岁(P = 0.54)。两组的基线特征相似,但PCI + MIVS组单支冠状动脉疾病、手术时使用氯吡格雷或双联抗血小板治疗的患病率更高,而接受CABG + 瓣膜手术的患者三支冠状动脉疾病更多。与CABG + 瓣膜手术相比,PCI + MIVS方法与主动脉阻断时间(94. 131分钟,P = 0.001)和体外循环时间(128. 190分钟,P < 0.001)缩短、术中较少输注浓缩红细胞(1.3. 3.8单位,P = 0.001)、重症监护病房住院时间缩短(41. 71小时,P < 0.001)以及机械通气时间延长(12.8%. 35.7%,P = 0.03)、再次插管(2.6%. 17.9%,P = 0.04)的发生率降低相关。PCI + MIVS组与CABG + 瓣膜组的30天和2年死亡率相似,分别为7.7%. 7.1%(P = 0.66)和12.8%. 10.7%(P = 0.55)。
与经正中开胸行CABG + 瓣膜手术相比,既往接受过心脏手术的患者采用PCI + MIVS混合方法与手术时间和重症监护病房住院时间缩短、术中较少需要输注血细胞、机械通气使用减少以及短期和随访生存率相似相关。需要进行随机试验和多中心注册研究以进一步评估这种方法。