Endoscopic aortic valve surgery in isolated and concomitant procedures

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate early outcomes of endoscopic aortic valve replacement (AVR) and risks of concomitant procedures done through the same working port. METHODS: At our institution, we performed a data analysis of 342 consecutive patients (from July 2013 to May 2021) who underwent endoscopic AVR with or without associated major procedure. Preoperative, intraoperative, postoperative data were evaluated. Subsequently, we perform a comparative analysis between the isolated and concomitant surgery group. The surgical access was a 3- to 4-cm working port in the second right intercostal space and 3 additional 5-mm mini-ports for the introduction of the thoracoscope, the transthoracic clamp and the vent line. Cardiopulmonary by-pass was achieved through peripheral cannulation. RESULTS: 105 patients (30.7%) underwent combined procedure: 2 coronary artery bypass (1.9%), 21 ascending aorta replacement (19.6%), 41 mitral surgery (38.3%), 16 mitral and tricuspid surgery (15%) and 25 other procedure (27%). Death occurred in 1 patient (0.4%) in the isolated group versus 2 patients (1.9%) in the combined group (P = 0.175). Seven strokes were observed, 4 in isolated procedures (1.7%) and 3 in the concomitant ones (2.85%) (P = 0.481). Surgical revision for bleeding was performed always through the same access in 13 patients (5.4%) versus 11 patients (10.4%) (P = 0.096). Pacemaker implantation was necessary in 5 patients (2.1%) versus 8 patients (7.6%) (P = 0.014). Median intubation time was 5 (2) h vs 6 (8) (P < 0.080). CONCLUSIONS: Through a single working port made for endoscopic AVR, a concomitant procedure may be done without affecting in-hospital mortality and postoperative stroke rate.