Less-Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement: Trends and Outcomes From The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database.

This study compares outcomes of conventional and less-invasive (LI) approaches for aortic valve replacement (AVR) using The Society of Thoracic Surgeons database.Between 2011 and 2017, we identified 122,474 patients undergoing isolated primary AVR. Patients were categorized into 3 groups: (1) full sternotomy (FS) (n = 98,549; 78%), (2) partial sternotomy (PS) (n = 17,306; 15%), and (3) right thoracotomy (RT) (n = 6619; 7%).The rate of LI-AVR increased from 17% in 2011 to 23% in 2016 (P < .001). Femoral cannulation was used in 1.5% of FS, 5.4% of PS, and 71% of RT patients (P < .001). Full sternotomy patients were older and had higher rates of preoperative renal failure, atrial fibrillation, and stroke, and had a higher NYHA function class, lower ejection fraction, and higher STS risk score. Total operative, cardiopulmonary bypass, and cross-clamp time were longest in RT-AVR patients and shortest in those who had FS-AVR. Overall, unadjusted operative mortality was 1.9% (1.05% among low-risk patients) and was not different among the 3 groups (1.97% FS, 1.77% PS, and 1.90% RT; P = .4). The rate of postoperative stroke was 1.2% and was not different among the 3 groups (1.2% FS, 1.3% PS, and 1.1% RT; P = .3). After risk adjustment, these differences remained nonsignificant. After risk adjustment, prolonged ventilation and atrial fibrillation were less common in PS-AVR patients. The adjusted risk for blood transfusion was lower in RT-AVR patients, as was the incidence of renal failure. Femoral cannulation was not associated with increased risk for stroke or mortality after LI-AVR.Less-invasive AVR is associated with an operative mortality and postoperative stroke rate similar to that of FS. Less-invasive AVRs should serve as a benchmark for comparison between transcatheter aortic valve replacement and surgical AVR in low-risk patients.

Duke Scholars

Author Maria Grau-Sepulveda