Minimally invasive surgery versus sternotomy in native mitral valve endocarditis: a matched comparison

Objectives: The present study compared the clinical outcomes between minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and median sternotomy (MS) in patients with native mitral valve infective endocarditis.

Methods: From 2009 to 2019, a total of 154 patients with acute (n = 131, 85%) or subacute (n = 23, 15%) native mitral valve infective endocarditis were included in the study. One-to-one nearest neighbour propensity score matching considering endocarditis severity using the dedicated De Feo score and 19 other clinically relevant baseline variables resulted in a population of 39 matched pairs. The matched cohort was investigated regarding operative and postoperative outcomes.

Results: Both groups showed similar results regarding cardiopulmonary bypass time [MIS: 96 min (77-138), MS: 99 min (88-127); P = 0.780] and aortic cross-clamp time [MIS: 64 min (54-90), MS: 65 min (59-83); P = 0.563], whereas overall operative time was shorter through minimally invasive access [MIS: 138 min (112-196), MS: 187 min (175-230); P = 0.005]. Although the rate of revision for bleeding was similar in both groups [MIS: 12.8% (n = 5), MS: 10.3% (n = 4); P = 1.000], MIS was associated with fewer red blood cell unit transfusions [MIS: 1 unit (0-4), MS: 4 units (2-10); P = 0.001] and fewer fresh frozen plasma unit transfusions [MIS: 0 units (0-0), MS: 1 unit (0-5); P = 0.002]. MIS was associated with a shorter ventilation time [MIS: 708 min (429-1236), MS: 1440 min (659-4411); P = 0.024] and a lower rate of reintubation after extubation [MIS: 5.1% (n = 2), MS: 25.6% (n = 10); P = 0.021].

Conclusions: In patients suffering from native mitral valve infective endocarditis, MIS provides significant clinical benefits over sternotomy in selected patients.

Subject collection: 117, 121.