Sandoval Elena, Bhoera Rahul A, Tomšič Anton, Morales-Rey Ignacio, García-Álvarez Ana, Palmen Meindert, Pereda Daniel
Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Hospital Clínic, Barcelona, Spain.
Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Netherlands.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2024 Nov 28;66(6). doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezae426.
Robotic-assisted mitral valve repair surgery has a steep learning curve, and it is not clear whether previous experience in minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) facilitates this process. We aimed to investigate the initial experience of 2 cardiac centres starting their robotic programmes, evaluating the impact of previous MIMVS experience.
Retrospective analysis was performed for the 1st consecutive cases operated due to severe degenerative mitral valve regurgitation using the robotic surgical platform in 2 European centres, 1 transitioning from conventional surgery (centre 1) and the other from mini thoracotomy MIMVS (centre 2). Cumulative sum analysis was used to evaluate the learning process using both surgical times and a combined primary outcome including relevant intra- and postoperative results.
First 62 patients in each centre were included. All median surgical times were shorter in centre 2: cardiopulmonary bypass: 238 vs 115 min, P < 0.001; cross-clamp: 143 vs 82 min, P < 0.001; and total intervention: 313 vs 228 min, P < 0.001. The combined primary outcome showed no significant differences (9.7% vs 8%; P = 1). However, the turning point making the end of the learning phase was detected at the 60th case in centre 1 and at the 50th in centre 2. Regarding surgical time, the learning curve was steeper in centre 1 with both cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp overcoming the learning phase after 32 cases, as compared to 16 cases in centre 2.
A successful robotic-assisted mitral repair programme can be safely started coming from either conventional open approach or mini thoracotomy MIMVS. However, previous mini thoracotomy MIMVS experience had positive impact on the initial learning curve.
机器人辅助二尖瓣修复手术的学习曲线较陡,目前尚不清楚既往微创二尖瓣手术(MIMVS)经验是否有助于这一过程。我们旨在调查两家开展机器人手术项目的心脏中心的初始经验,评估既往MIMVS经验的影响。
对欧洲两家中心因严重退行性二尖瓣反流而使用机器人手术平台进行的连续首例病例进行回顾性分析,一家中心从传统手术转型(中心1),另一家从微创开胸MIMVS转型(中心2)。采用累积和分析,通过手术时间和包括相关术中和术后结果的综合主要结局来评估学习过程。
每家中心纳入了前62例患者。中心2的所有中位手术时间均较短:体外循环时间:238分钟对115分钟,P<0.001;阻断时间:143分钟对82分钟,P<0.001;总干预时间:313分钟对228分钟,P<0.001。综合主要结局无显著差异(9.7%对8%;P = 1)。然而,中心1在第60例病例时、中心2在第50例病例时检测到学习阶段结束的转折点。关于手术时间,中心1的学习曲线更陡,体外循环和阻断时间在32例病例后克服学习阶段,而中心2为16例。
无论是从传统开放手术还是微创开胸MIMVS开始,都可以安全地启动成功的机器人辅助二尖瓣修复项目。然而,既往微创开胸MIMVS经验对初始学习曲线有积极影响。