[Comparison of anterolateral minithoracotomy versus partial upper hemisternotomy in aortic valve replacement]

To compare the results of aortic valve replacement through anterolateral minithoracotomy (RT) and partial upper hemisternotomy (PS) approaches.

This was a retrospective, observational, cohort study of collected data on 297 patients undergoing isolated primary aortic valve replacement between July 2009 and March 2016 at Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University. There were 174 male and 123 female patients, aging from 15 to 73 years with a mean age of (51±13) years. Of these, 132 were performed through right RT and 165 through PS. Outcomes of the two groups were compared by t test, t' test, rank-sum test and χ(2) test, respectively.

The overall in-hospital mortality was 1.7% (5/297), with no difference between the 2 groups (3.0%, 4/132 vs. 0.6%, 1/165, P=0.175 ). Patients in the RT group had longer cardiopulmonary bypass ((92±27) minutes vs. (76±18) minutes, t'=5.848, P=0.000)and crossclamping ((56±21) minutes vs. (43±12) minutes, t'=6.333, P=0.000)times. Three patients in the RT group and two patients required intraoperative conversion. Patients by way of RT was associated with a lower incidence of blood transfusions (20.4% vs. 39.4%, χ(2)=12.303, P=0.001) and less drainage (250 (307) ml vs. 570 (370) ml, Z=8.161, P=0.000). In addition, patients in RT group had a shorter postoperative length of stay (5(4) days vs. 9(10) days, Z=4.548, P=0.000).

Aortic valve replacement via RT and PS are both safe and feasible. The approach through PS is associated with better exposure, more extensive indication for surgery, and more suitable to heart centers which intend to carry out miminally invasive aortic valve replacement. While, for an experienced surgeon, the approach through right RT is worthy of clinical selective application for patients concern more about good cosmetic result, and patients have faster recovery by avoid sternotomy through RT approach.