Thoracic Surgery Department, Hospital Lusíadas Lisboa; UMICS, Unit for Minimally Invasive Cardiothoracic Surgery. Portugal.
UMICS, Unit for Minimally Invasive Cardiothoracic Surgery.
Port J Card Thorac Vasc Surg. 2024 Feb 9;30(4):15-22. doi: 10.48729/pjctvs.429.
Minimally invasive cardiac surgery has evolved over the past few decades, thanks to advancements in technology and surgical techniques. These advancements have allowed surgeons to perform cardiac interventions through small incisions, reducing surgical trauma and improving patient outcomes1. However, despite these advancements, thoracoscopic mitral repair has not been widely adopted by the cardiac surgery community, possibly due to the lack of familiarity with video-assisted procedures1. Over the years, various minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) techniques have been developed to achieve comparable or better results while minimizing surgical trauma. These techniques have evolved from direct-vision procedures performed through a right thoracotomy with a rib retractor to video-directed approaches using long-shafted instruments1. Robotic surgery, introduced in the late 90s, has also played a significant role in mitral valve repair. The da Vinci system, the only robotic platform currently used for cardiac surgery, provides surgeons with enhanced dexterity and high-definition 3D visualization, allowing for precise and accurate procedure2, and is now the preferred approach for mitral repair in many programs3. The first mitral repair using the da Vinci system was performed in Europe by Carpentier and Mohr in 1998, followed by the first mitral replacement by Chitwood in the USA in 20002-4. The advantages of robotic technology allow surgeons to perform complex repair techniques such as papillary muscle repositioning and sliding leaflet plasty4. Studies have shown that robotic mitral surgery results in shorter ICU and hospital stays, better quality of life postoperatively, and improved cosmesis compared to conventional surgery5,6. In our experience, we have also observed significant benefits with robotic surgery, including reduced blood loss and the need for transfusions. This can be attributed to the closed-chest technique, which eliminates the need for a thoracotomy and rib retractor, reducing the risk of bleeding associated with these approaches7. In this article, we will compare the surgical steps of endoscopic and robotic mitral valve repair, providing detailed information on patient selection, operative techniques, and the requirements for building a successful program. By understanding the advantages and challenges of both approaches, surgeons can make informed decisions and provide the best possible care for their patients. Combined ablation and multivalvular procedures are mostly performed in few centers by minimally invasive techniques.
微创心脏外科在过去几十年中得到了发展,这要归功于技术和手术技术的进步。这些进步使外科医生能够通过小切口进行心脏介入,减少手术创伤并改善患者的预后。然而,尽管有这些进步,胸腔镜二尖瓣修复术并未被心脏外科界广泛采用,这可能是由于对视频辅助手术缺乏熟悉度。多年来,已经开发了各种微创二尖瓣手术 (MIMVS) 技术,以在最小化手术创伤的同时实现可比或更好的结果。这些技术已经从通过右开胸和肋骨牵开器进行的直接观察手术演变为使用长柄器械的视频引导方法。机器人手术于 90 年代后期推出,在二尖瓣修复中也发挥了重要作用。达芬奇系统是目前唯一用于心脏手术的机器人平台,为外科医生提供了更高的灵活性和高清晰度的 3D 可视化,实现了精确和准确的手术操作,并且现在是许多项目中二尖瓣修复的首选方法。达芬奇系统首次用于二尖瓣修复是在 1998 年由 Carpentier 和 Mohr 在欧洲进行的,随后在 2000 年由 Chitwood 在美国进行了首例二尖瓣置换。机器人技术的优势使外科医生能够进行复杂的修复技术,如乳头肌重定位和滑动瓣成形术。研究表明,与传统手术相比,机器人二尖瓣手术可导致 ICU 和住院时间更短、术后生活质量更好且美容效果更好。根据我们的经验,我们还观察到机器人手术带来了显著的益处,包括减少出血量和输血需求。这可以归因于闭合胸腔技术,该技术消除了开胸术和肋骨牵开器的需要,降低了与这些方法相关的出血风险。在本文中,我们将比较内镜和机器人二尖瓣修复的手术步骤,提供有关患者选择、手术技术以及建立成功计划的要求的详细信息。通过了解两种方法的优缺点,外科医生可以做出明智的决策,并为患者提供最佳的护理。联合消融和多瓣膜手术主要由少数中心通过微创技术完成。