Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 32  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 599-603

Comparison of perioperative morbidity and mortality in minimally invasive versus conventional mitral valve surgery

1 Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Menoufia University, Shebeen El-Kom, Menoufia, Egypt
2 Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, National Heart Institute, Imbaba, Giza, Egypt

Correspondence Address:
Samer WG Girgis
76 Elbanafseg 3, First Assembly, Newcairo, Cairo
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/mmj.mmj_767_17

Rights and Permissions

Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate a new approach for mitral valve surgery (MVS) in National Heart Institute, Egypt, comparing operative data, total hospital stay, and hospital morbidity and mortality between conventional and minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS). Background MVS using full sternotomy is the conventional approach. Despite this procedure showing excellent postoperative outcomes, in the past two decades, MIMVS has gained consensus among surgeons as it provided greater patients satisfaction, better cosmoses, less hospital stay, and faster recovery maintaining same quality and safety. Patients and methods This prospective study was conducted on fifty patients requiring mitral valve replacement with or without tricuspid valve repair, and the patients were classified into two groups: group I (conventional) was operated on using conventional median sternotomy, and group II (minimally invasive) was operated on using video-assisted right anterolateral mini-thoracotomy and peripheral femoral cannulation. Results There was no significant difference in the preoperative data for patients of both groups. Moreover, there was no mortality in both groups but significant differences in incision length, ventilation time, blood loss (P = 0.001), blood transfusion (P = 0.01), and ICU stay (P = 0.001) were found. In addition, total hospital stay was significantly less in group II (9.6 ± 2.18 vs. 5.64 ± 0.7 days, P = 0.001). Conclusion In patients with mitral valve diseases, MIMVS is feasible for MVS without affecting the core of surgery or compromising the surgical target, with some advantages such as shorter ICU stay and faster recovery.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded34    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal