Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 1, 2026

Fully Endoscopic Mitral Valve Repair with Percutaneous Cannulation of Groin Vessels
Published on: May 26, 2023
A minimally invasive approach is more cost-effective than a traditional sternotomy approach for mitral valve surgery
Alexander Iribarne1, Rachel Easterwood, Mark J Russo
1Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Objective:
The aim of this study was to compare the cost and effectiveness of a minimally invasive (MI) versus traditional sternotomy (ST) approach for mitral valve surgery (MVS).
Methods:
From January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2008, a total of 847 patients underwent isolated MVS at our institution. Propensity matching on 22 clinical variables was carried out to generate a study cohort of 434 patients (217 matched pairs). Direct and indirect costs from the hospital perspective were retrospectively obtained from our finance department. Total hospital costs were further stratified into 13 standardized institutional billing categories. In addition, data on morbidity, mortality, discharge location, hospital readmissions within 1 year, and freedom from reoperation were obtained.
Results:
Compared with ST, MIMVS was associated with a $9054 ± $3302 lower mean total hospital cost (P = .006), driven largely by a reduction in direct (P = .003) versus indirect costs (P = .06). Among the 13 billing categories, MIMVS was associated with a significant reduction in costs of cardiac imaging (P = .004), laboratory tests (P = .005), boarding and nursing (P = .001), and radiology (P = .002). More patients in the ST group required intubation for more than 72 hours (P = .019); however, there were no differences in morbidity or long-term survival (P = .334). A higher proportion of MI patients were discharged home with no nursing services (P = .018), and a higher proportion of ST patients required readmission within 1 year (P = .023). There were no differences in freedom from reoperation between groups (P = .574).
Conclusions:
With equivalent efficacy across a range of measures and lower costs compared with ST, MIMVS represents a cost-saving strategy for MVS.
Insights
Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) offers a cost-saving strategy compared to traditional sternotomy (ST) for mitral valve surgery (MVS). MIMVS demonstrates equivalent efficacy with lower hospital costs and reduced readmissions, making it a favorable approach.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Surgery
- Health Economics
Background:
- Mitral valve surgery (MVS) traditionally involves sternotomy (ST), a procedure with significant associated costs.
- Minimally invasive (MI) approaches to MVS have emerged, necessitating a comparison of their cost-effectiveness.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the cost and effectiveness of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) versus traditional sternotomy (ST) for MVS.
- To identify specific cost drivers and clinical outcomes associated with each surgical approach.
Main Methods:
- A retrospective analysis of 847 patients undergoing isolated MVS between 2003 and 2008.
- Propensity matching of 434 patients (217 pairs) based on 22 clinical variables.
- Analysis of direct and indirect hospital costs, morbidity, mortality, discharge disposition, readmissions, and reoperation rates.
Main Results:
- MIMVS was associated with significantly lower mean total hospital costs ($9054 ± $3302 reduction, P=.006) compared to ST.
- Cost reductions in MIMVS were observed in cardiac imaging, laboratory tests, nursing care, and radiology.
- No significant differences in morbidity or long-term survival were found between MIMVS and ST.
- MI patients had higher rates of discharge home without nursing services (P=.018), while ST patients had higher 1-year readmission rates (P=.023).
Conclusions:
- Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) is a cost-saving strategy for MVS.
- MIMVS demonstrates equivalent efficacy to traditional sternotomy (ST) across various clinical measures.
- The findings support MIMVS as a preferred approach due to its economic benefits and comparable patient outcomes.
Related Concept Videos
Mitral Stenosis III: Medical Management
Mitral Regurgitation III: Medical Management
Mitral Stenosis I: Introduction
Mitral Valve Prolapse II: Assessment and Management
Mitral Stenosis IV: Nursing Management
Mitral Stenosis II: Clinical features and Diagnostic Tests

