Endoscopic Mitral Repair: Evolution to Robotics – Endo-balloon Aortic Occlusion Technique

  • Juan B. Grau
  • Aaron W. Eckhauser
  • W. Clark HargroveIII
Chapter

Abstract

Mitral valve repair (MVP) enables preservation of the entire native valve apparatus. Compared to a prosthetic replacement, repairs have been shown to improve postoperative left ventricular function and lower the risk of thromboembolic and bleeding events. Many studies have demonstrated a long-term survival benefit of MVP versus mitral valve replacement. Minimally invasive mitral valve repairs have been shown to be equal in quality and durability, compared to the open approach. Moreover, less invasive methods provide reduced blood loss, fewer transfusions; shorter mechanical ventilator times, and less intensive unit care stays. Also, patients benefit from less pain, better cosmesis, and a shorter overall recovery time. These benefits outweigh the moderate increase in risk afforded by longer cardiopulmonary perfusion and cardiac arrest times. It is probable that in the future, the sternotomy incision will be a used much less in primary mitral valve surgery. Nevertheless, mastering minimally invasive techniques requires a steep learning curve for both the surgeon and operating room staff. This chapter details the use of endoscopic assistance and endoballoon aortic occlusion for minimally invasive mitral valve repairs. These methods should be used in team and surgeon preparation to advance toward totally endoscopic robotic mitral valve surgery. We believe that new technology should be added serially to a mastered operation rather than relying on several complex advancements at once.

Keywords

Mitral Repair Endo-balloon Aorta Endoscopic Robotic 

References

  1. 1.
    Gammie JS, Sheng S, Griffith BP, Peterson E, Rankin JS, O’Brien SM, et al. Trends in mitral valve surgery in the United States: results from the society of thoracic surgeons adult cardiac database. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009;87:1431–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bolling SF, Li S, O’Brien SM, Brennan JM, Prager RL, Gammie JS. Predictors of mitral valve repair: clinical and surgeon factors. Ann Thorac Surg. 2010;90:1904–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Chatterjee K, Writing Committee, et al. 2008 focused update incorporated into the ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2008;118:e523–661.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vahanian A, Alfieri O, Andreotti F, et al. The Joint Task Force on the Management of Valvular Heart Disease of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease (version 2012). Eur Heart J. 2012;33:2451–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    David TE, Ivanov J, Armstrong S, Rakowski H. Late outcomes of mitral valve repair for floppy valves: implications for asymptomatic patients. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2003;125:1143–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Suri RM, Schaff HV, Dearani JA, Sundt 3rd TM, Daly RC, Mullany CJ, et al. Survival advantage and improved durability of mitral repair for leaflet prolapse subsets in the current era. Ann Thorac Surg. 2006;82:819–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    McClure RS, Cohn LH, Wiegerinck E, Couper GS, Aranki SF, Bolman 3rd RM, et al. Early and late outcomes in minimally invasive mitral valve repair: an eleven-year experience in 707 patients. Jour Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;137:70–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Casselman FP, Van Slycke S, Wellens F, De Geest R, Degrieck I, Van Praet F, et al. Mitral valve surgery can now routinely be performed endoscopically. Circulation. 2003;108 Suppl 1:II48–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Modi P, Rodriguez E, Hargrove 3rd WC, Hassan A, Szeto WY, Chitwood Jr WR. Minimally invasive video-assisted mitral valve surgery: a 12-year, 2-center experience in 1178 patients. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;137:1481–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Seeburger J, Borger MA, Falk V, Kuntze T, Czesla M, Walther T, et al. Minimal invasive mitral valve repair for mitral regurgitation: results of 1339 consecutive patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2008;34:760–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Suri RM, Schaff HV, Meyer SR, Hargrove WC. Thoracoscopic versus open mitral valve repair: a propensity score analysis of early outcomes. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009;88:1185–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Umakanthan R, Leacche M, Petracek MR, Kumar S, Solenkova NV, Kaiser CA, et al. Safety of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery without aortic cross-clamp. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;85:1544–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Carpentier A. Cardiac valve surgery: the “French connection”. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1983;86(3):323–37.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Taylor B, Vanermen H. Totally endoscopic mitral valve repair. Oper Tech Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2007;12(4):226–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Woo YJ. Minimally invasive valve surgery. Surg Clin N Am. 2009;89:923–49.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Juan B. Grau
    • 1
  • Aaron W. Eckhauser
    • 2
  • W. Clark HargroveIII
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryColumbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, The Valley Columbia Heart Center, The Valley HospitalRidgewoodUSA
  2. 2.Division of Pediatric Cardiothoracic SurgeryUniversity of UtahSalt Lake CityUSA
  3. 3.UP School of MedicineUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA
  4. 4.Department of SurgeryUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA
  5. 5.Divisions of Cardiovascular SurgeryPenn Presbyterian Medical Center, Philadelphia Heart InstitutePhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations