Cohn L H, Adams D H, Couper G S, Bichell D P, Rosborough D M, Sears S P, Aranki S F
Brigham and Women's Hospital, Department of Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA.
Ann Surg. 1997 Oct;226(4):421-6; discussion 427-8. doi: 10.1097/00000658-199710000-00003.
This study compares the quality of valve replacement and repair performed through minimally invasive incisions as compared to the standard operation for aortic and mitral valve replacement.
With the advent of minimally invasive laparoscopic approaches to orthopedic surgery, urology, general surgery, and thoracic surgery, it now is apparent that standard cardiac valve operations can be performed through very small incisions with similar approaches.
Eighty-four patients underwent minimally invasive aortic (n = 41) and minimally invasive mitral valve repair and replacement (n = 43) between July 1996 and April 1997. Demographics, procedures, operative techniques, and postoperative morbidity and mortality were calculated, and a subset of the first 50 patients was compared to a 50-patient cohort who underwent the same operation through a conventional median sternotomy. Demographics, postoperative morbidity and mortality, patient satisfaction, and charges were compared.
Of the 84 patients, there were 2 operative mortalities both in class IV aortic patients from multisystem organ failure. There was no operative mortality in the patients undergoing mitral valve replacement or repair. The operations were carried out with the same accuracy and attention to detail as with the conventional operation. There was minimal postoperative bleeding, cerebral vascular accidents, or other major morbidity. Groin cannulation complications primarily were related to atherosclerotic femoral arteries. A comparison of the minimally invasive to the conventional group, although operative time and ischemia time was higher in minimally invasive group, the requirement for erythrocytes was significantly less, patient satisfaction was significantly greater, and charges were approximately 20% less than those in the conventional group.
Minimally invasive aortic and mitral valve surgery in patients without coronary disease can be done safely and accurately through small incisions. Patient satisfaction is up, return to normality is higher, and requirement for postrehabilitation services is less. In addition, the charges are approximately 20% less. These results serve as a paradigm for the future in terms of valve surgery in the managed care environment.
本研究比较了通过微创切口进行瓣膜置换和修复与主动脉瓣和二尖瓣置换标准手术的质量。
随着微创腹腔镜手术方法在骨科手术、泌尿外科手术、普通外科手术和胸外科手术中的出现,现在很明显,标准心脏瓣膜手术可以通过非常小的切口采用类似方法进行。
1996年7月至1997年4月期间,84例患者接受了微创主动脉瓣手术(n = 41)以及微创二尖瓣修复和置换手术(n = 43)。计算了人口统计学数据、手术过程、手术技术以及术后发病率和死亡率,并将前50例患者的一个子集与通过传统正中胸骨切开术进行相同手术的50例患者队列进行了比较。比较了人口统计学数据、术后发病率和死亡率、患者满意度以及费用。
84例患者中,IV级主动脉瓣疾病患者中有2例因多系统器官衰竭导致手术死亡。二尖瓣置换或修复患者中无手术死亡。手术的准确性和对细节的关注与传统手术相同。术后出血、脑血管意外或其他主要并发症极少。腹股沟插管并发症主要与股动脉粥样硬化有关。微创组与传统组比较,虽然微创组手术时间和缺血时间较长,但红细胞需求量显著较少,患者满意度显著更高,费用比传统组低约20%。
无冠心病患者的微创主动脉瓣和二尖瓣手术可以通过小切口安全、准确地完成。患者满意度提高,恢复正常的程度更高,康复后服务需求更少。此外,费用约低20%。这些结果为管理式医疗环境下未来瓣膜手术提供了范例。