Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Replacement Versus Conventional Approach: Comparison of Early Postoperative Outcomes.
Overview
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Intervention
- Not specified
- Conditions
- Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery
- Sponsor
- Sohag University
- Enrollment
- 50
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- post-operative pain
- Last Updated
- 3 years ago
Overview
Brief Summary
The term minimally invasive mitral valve surgery has been reported (MIMVS) by American Heart Association and referred to a collection of new techniques. All of these new techniques aiming to reduce surgical trauma by minimizing surgical incision, modified perfusion methods and use of new instruments . The right anterior mini-thoracotomy is the most common approach, next to it the lower mini-sternotomy approach, then the parasternal incision or the left posterior thoracotomy approach .
Technically MIMVS is more complex, requires a special learning curve and associated with higher Incidence of neurological events, aortic dissection, groin complications and infection despite all these benefits . MIVS also has controversies among cardiac surgeons, because it makes the exposure worse and requires a more complex surgery, which may lead to a less satisfying effect
Investigators
abdelhamed alaaeldin ali
Assistant lecture of cardiothoracic surgery
Sohag University
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- •Patients with isolated rheumatic mitral valve disease in need for mitral valve replacement.
Exclusion Criteria
- •Redo mitral valve replacement.
- •Emergency mitral valve replacement (non-rheumatic cases).
- •Patients who have combined other valve diseases e.g. (severe Aortic Regurgitation).
- •Patients need Tricuspid valve repair or replacement.
- •Severely calcified mitral valve disease (mitral annular calcification).
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
post-operative pain
Time Frame: immediately post operative
pain score
total hospital stay in days
Time Frame: maximum 7 days
days in hospital included ICU stay and ward stay