实用医学杂志 ›› 2022, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (20): 2597-2601.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006⁃5725.2022.20.016

• 新技术新方法 • 上一篇    下一篇

右胸前外侧小切口与胸骨上段小切口在主动脉瓣置换术中的短期疗效比较 

刘俊祥 王怡轩 郭超    

  1. 华中科技大学同济医学院附属协和医院心脏大血管外科(武汉 430022

  • 出版日期:2022-10-25 发布日期:2022-10-25
  • 通讯作者: 郭超 E⁃mail:95256371@qq.com
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金青年科学基金项目(编号:82001701)

Short ⁃ term efficacy of right mini ⁃ thoracotomy vs. partial upper sternotomy in aortic valve replacement

LIU JunxiangWANG YixuanGUO Chao.   

  1. Department of Cardiovascular SurgeryUnion HospitalTongji Medical CollegeHuazhong University of Science and TechnologyWuhan 430022China

  • Online:2022-10-25 Published:2022-10-25
  • Contact: GUO Chao E⁃mail:95256371@qq.com

摘要:

目的 探讨右胸前外侧小切口(right mini⁃thoracotomyRMT)与胸骨上段切口(partial upper sternotomyPUS)手术方法在主动脉瓣置换术(aortic valve replacementAVR)中的应用及短期临床疗效。 方法 采用回顾性分析法纳入 2017 8 月至 2021 6 月在华中科技大学同济医学院附属协和医院行直 视下 RMT PUS 行主动脉瓣置换术的患者总共 240 例,其中 RMT 120 例,PUS 120 例。观察两组患者术前 病史资料、术中情况、术后并发症和短期的随访情况。结果 两组患者术前一般特征具有可比性,且均 能成功有效完成瓣膜手术。RMT 组术中体外循环时间(P = 0.02)、主动脉阻断时间偏长(P = 0.03),但总 输血量(P = 0.02)、术后 ICU 停留时间(P = 0.02)、术后住院时间(P = 0.04)、术后并发症等短期预后指标均 明显好于 PUS 组。术后近期随访,两组生存率及重大并发症发生率方面差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。 结论 经右胸小切口行主动脉瓣置换术安全可行,可结合胸腔镜辅助,相对于胸骨上段切口患者具有术 后创伤小、恢复快、住院时间短、切口美观等优势,可取得与胸骨上段切口完全相同的近期手术效果,在无 禁忌证的情况下有望成为部分患者主动脉瓣置换手术中的常规选择。

关键词:

微创心脏外科, 右胸微创切口, 胸骨上段切口, 心脏瓣膜假体植入

Abstract:

Objective To explore the short⁃term clinical effect of the two approachesright mini⁃thoracot⁃ omyRMTand partial upper sternotomyPUSin aortic valve replacementAVRcomparatively. Methods A total of 240 patients who underwent aortic valve replacement with RMTn = 120and PUSn = 120from August 2017 to June 2021 in Union Hospital were enrolled in the retrospective analysis. The preoperative historygeneral situation of operationpostoperative complications and follow ⁃ up results were compared between the two groups. Results The preoperative baseline characteristics of the two groups were comparableand all valvular surgeries were completed successfully and effectively. The cardiopulmonary bypass timeP = 0.02and aortic cross⁃clamping timeP = 0.03in the RMT group were longer than those in the PUS groupbut the total value of blood transfusion was significantly smallerP = 0.02),the ICU stay and postoperative hospitalization were both significantly shorter P = 0.02P = 0.04),and the rate of postoperative complications was significantly smaller than those in PUS group. The short⁃term follow⁃up showed no significant difference in the survival rate and the rate of major complications between the two groupsP > 0.05. Conclusion Aortic valve replacement through RMT is safe and feasiblewhich can be combined with video⁃assisted thoracoscopy. Compared with PUSRMT has the advantages of less traumarapider recoveryshorter postoperative hospital stay and better cosmetic results. The short⁃term effect of RMT is exactly the same as that of PUSthus it is expected to become a routine choice for some patients undergoing aortic valve replacement in case of no contraindications.

Key words:

minimally invasive cardiac surgery, right mini ?thoracotomy, partial upper sternotomy, heart valve prosthesis implantation