Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 25, 2026

Fully Endoscopic Mitral Valve Repair with Percutaneous Cannulation of Groin Vessels
Published on: May 26, 2023
Safety of Custodiol for Myocardial Protection in Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Repair: A Japanese Single-Center
Hiroaki Aizawa1, Akihiro Yoshitake1, Yuki Katsunori2
1Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Hidaka, Saitama, Japan.
Insights
Custodiol offers comparable myocardial protection to cold blood cardioplegia in mitral valve repair. This study found lower creatine kinase-MB levels with Custodiol in minimally invasive procedures.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Cardiac Surgery
- Cardioplegia Solutions
Background:
- Limited data exists on Custodiol safety for minimally invasive mitral valve repair in Asian populations.
- Comparison with traditional open repair methods using cold blood cardioplegia is needed.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the efficacy of Custodiol versus repetitive cold blood cardioplegia.
- To evaluate myocardial protection in minimally invasive versus open mitral valve repair.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of 98 minimally invasive (Custodiol) and 70 open (cold blood cardioplegia) mitral valve repair patients.
- Primary endpoints: creatine kinase-MB levels and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).
- Echocardiography used for pre- and post-surgery LVEF assessment.
Main Results:
- Significantly lower peak creatine kinase-MB levels within 48 hours post-surgery in the minimally invasive group (45.0 U/L) vs. open repair (60.7 U/L; p <0.001).
- This difference persisted after excluding Maze or PVI procedures (42.4 vs. 50.0 U/L; p = 0.009).
- Pre- and post-surgery LVEF were comparable between groups (p > 0.20).
Conclusions:
- Custodiol provides myocardial protection equivalent to repetitive cold blood cardioplegia.
- Minimally invasive mitral valve repair with Custodiol is a safe and effective alternative.
Purpose:
Research regarding Custodiol's safety in minimally invasive mitral valve repair remains limited in Asian populations. We compared Custodiol in minimally invasive mitral valve repair to repetitive cold blood cardioplegia in open mitral valve repair.
Methods:
We retrospectively evaluated 98 consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive mitral valve repair with Custodiol and 70 consecutive patients who underwent open mitral valve repair with repetitive cold blood cardioplegia at our institution between January 2015 and December 2024. The primary endpoints were creatine kinase-myocardial band (MB) levels and left ventricular ejection fraction determined by echocardiography pre- and post-surgery.
Results:
Maximum creatine kinase-MB levels within 48 h post-surgery were significantly lower in the minimally invasive group than in the open repair group, both in the overall cohort (45.0 vs. 60.7 U/L; p <0.001, respectively) and after excluding patients who underwent Maze procedure or pulmonary vein isolation (42.4 vs. 50.0 U/L; p = 0.009, respectively). Left ventricular ejection fraction pre- and post-surgery was comparable between the minimally invasive and open repair groups (72% vs. 69%; p = 0.426 and 59% vs. 60%; p = 0.204, respectively).
Conclusion:
Custodiol during minimally invasive mitral valve repair provides myocardial protection comparable to repetitive cold blood cardioplegia in open mitral valve repair.
Related Concept Videos
Mitral Stenosis III: Medical Management
Mitral Regurgitation III: Medical Management
Pericarditis III: Medical Management

