Clinical Comparison of Robot-Assisted and Conventional Thoracotomy with Mitral Valvuloplasty

Author(s): Liming YIN, Sumin YANG

Objective To compare the clinical therapeutic effects of robot-assisted and conventional thoracotomy with mitral valvuloplasty, and to further clarify the advantages and disadvantages of the Da Vinci robotic surgery system in cardiac surgery. Method A total of 116 patients with mitral valvuloplasty were enrolled from November 2014 to July 2018 in the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, which included 38 cases of the robot-assisted mitral valvuloplasty and 78 cases of conventional thoracotomy with mitral valvuloplasty; the clinical treatment of the two patient groups was compared and analyzed. Result The surgical outcomes of the two groups were satisfactory and there were no deaths in the hospital. The operation time, cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time, and ascending aorta occlusion time were longer in the Da Vinci group than in the conventional group (P<0.05). Intensive care unit（ICU） time, tracheal intubation time, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative blood transfusion, postoperative drainage and incidence of postoperative complications were lower in the Da Vinci group than in the conventional group (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in postoperative cardiac ultrasound results between the Da Vinci group and the conventional group. (P>0.05). Conclusion Robotic technique can be safely and effectively be applied in mitral valvuloplasty, and can significantly shorten the ICU time, tracheal intubation time and postoperative hospital stay, also reduce postoperative blood transfusion, postoperative drainage, and incidence of postoperative complications. Robot-assisted surgery is a good choice for minimally invasive surgery, but its operation time, extracorporeal circulation time and ascending aorta occlusion time are longer than conventional surgery, and further improvement is needed.

Minimally Invasive Surgery, Computer-Aided Surgery, Thoracotomy, Mitral Valve Insufficiency

1. Carpentier, A., Loulmet, D., Aupècle, B., Kieffer, J. P., Tournay, D., & Guibourt, P., et al. (1998). [computer assisted open heart surgery. first case operated on with success]. Comptes Rendus De Lacademie Des Sciences Serie III Sciences De La Vie, 321(5), 437.
2. Qin, J. X., Shiota, T., Mccarthy, P. M., Asher, C. R., Hail, M., & Agler, D. A., et al. (2004). Importance of mitral valve repair associated with left ventricular reconstruction for patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy: a real-time three-dimensional echocardiographic study. Acc Current Journal Review, 13(3), 38.
3. Okada, Y., Nasu, M., Takahashi, Y., Handa, N., Fujiwara, H., & Shinkai, M., et al. (2003). Late results of mitral valve repair for mitral regurgitation. Jpn J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 51(7), 282-288.
4. Casselman, F. P., Van, S. S., Dom, H., Lambrechts, D. L., Vermeulen, Y., & Vanermen, H. (2003). Endoscopic mitral valve repair: feasible, reproducible, and durable. Journal of Thoracic & Cardiovascular Surgery, 125(2), 273-282.
5. Chauvaud, S., Fuzellier, J. F., Berrebi, A., Deloche, A., Fabiani, J. N., & Carpentier, A. (2001). Long-term (29 years) results of reconstructive surgery in rheumatic mitral valve insufficiency. Circulation, 104(1), 12-5.
6. Suri, R. M., Burkhart, H. M., Daly, R. C., Dearani, J. A., Park, S. J., & Iii, T. M. S., et al. (2011). Robotic mitral valve repair for all prolapse subsets using techniques identical to open valvuloplasty: establishing the benchmark against which percutaneous interventions should be judged. Journal of Thoracic & Cardiovascular Surgery, 142(5), 970-979.
7. Tatooles, A. J., Pappas, P. S., Gordon, P. J., & Slaughter, M. S. (2004). Minimally invasive mitral valve repair using the da vinci robotic system. Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 77(6), 1978-1984.
8. Narayanan, M. A., Suri, R. M., Ugur, M., Greason, K. L., Stulak, J. M., & Dearani, J. A., et al. (2015). Predictors of survival and modes of failure after mitroflow aortic valve replacement in 1,003 adults. Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 100(2), 560-567.
9. Mihaljevic, T., Jarrett, C. M., Gillinov, A. M., & Blackstone, E. H. (2010). A novel running annuloplasty suture technique for robotically assisted mitral valve repair. Journal of Thoracic & Cardiovascular Surgery, 139(5), 1343-1344.
10. Singh, S. N., Fletcher, R. D., Fisher, S. G., Singh, B. N., Lewis, H. D., & Deedwania, P. C., et al. (1996). Amiodarone in patients with congestive heart failure and asymptomatic ventricular arrhythmia. survival trial of antiarrhythmic therapy in congestive heart failure. N Engl J Med, 333(2), 77-82.
11. Mihaljevic, T., Jarrett, C. M., Gillinov, A. M., Williams, S. J., Devilliers, P. A., & Stewart, W. J., et al. (2011). Robotic repair of posterior mitral valve prolapse versus conventional approaches: potential realized. Journal of Thoracic & Cardiovascular Surgery, 141(1), 72-80.e4.
12. Kottenberg-Assenmacher, E., Kamler, M., & Peters, J. (2010). Minimally invasive endoscopic port‐access™ intracardiac surgery with one lung ventilation: impact on gas exchange and anaesthesia resources. Anaesthesia, 62(3), 231-238.
13. Robicsek, F. (2008). Robotic cardiac surgery: time told!. Journal of Thoracic & Cardiovascular Surgery, 135(2), 243-246.
14. Chauhan, S., & Sukesan, S. (2010). Anesthesia for robotic cardiac surgery: an amalgam of technology and skill. Annals of Cardiac Anaesthesia,13,2(2010-05-3), 13(2), 169.
15. Colangelo, N., Torracca, L., Lapenna, E., Moriggia, S., Crescenzi, G., & Alfieri, O. (2006). Vacuum-assisted venous drainage in extrathoracic cardiopulmonary bypass management during minimally invasive cardiac surgery. Perfusion, 21(6), 361.