Transcatheter procedures have overtaken conventional operations in Germany. Considering that this is a highly competitive field, a rate of 25% for minimal access aortic valve replacement seems to be disappointingly low. One way to promote minimal access techniques is through the systematic use of rapid deployment valves. A total of 143 patients underwent rapid deployment aortic valve replacement via upper right hemisternotomy between March 2012 and September 2015. All patients were followed up annually. Echocardiographic assessment of the valve was performed after 12 months. The cumulative follow-up time was 275.2 patient-years. The median follow-up time was 1.9 years. The mean age was 76.4 ± 6.2 years, and the mean logistic EuroSCORE was 11.0 ± 4.3%. Early all-cause mortality was 2.8% (n = 4). Actuarial survival after 1 year was 91.6 ± 2.4%, and after 3 years, it was 84.4 ± 3.6%. Mean transprosthetic gradient after 12 months was 10.3 ± 3.8 mmHg. New onset of higher grade paravalvular leakage did not occur during the follow-up period. Perioperatively, higher grade paravalvular leakage (aortic insufficiency >1⁺) occurred in 2 cases (1.4%) . Rapid deployment aortic valve replacement can be performed safely in a minimal access setting with low complication rates and good haemodynamic results. Therefore, rapid deployment valves are a relevant option in minimal access surgery.

Background Multiple valve surgery is associated with significant higher operative risks. Reduced cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times in multiple valve surgery may potentially be beneficial as they can be considered independent risk factors for increased morbidity and mortality following cardiac surgery. We report first intermediate outcomes of the Edwards Intuity valve system (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California, United States) in combined procedures Methods Fifty-eight patients underwent rapid deployment aortic valve replacement with concomitant mitral valve surgery between January 2014 and November 2017 in our institution. The valve was assessed echocardiographically after 12 months. The median follow-up was 1.7 years with a cumulative follow-up time of 115.3 patient years. Results The mean age was 73.5 ± 6.2 years and the mean logistic Euroscore was 11.6 ± 3.1%. Concomitant mitral valve repair was performed in 43 cases (74.1%), and mitral valve replacement in 15 cases (19.0%). The mean cross-clamp time was 93 ± 21 minutes along with a mean bypass time of 118 ± 24 minutes. All-cause mortality after 30 days was 8.6%. Overall actuarial survival at 1 year was 87.2 ± 4.5% and after 2 years 82.8 ± 5.3%, respectively. Conclusions Rapid deployment aortic valve replacement in multiple valve surgery can be performed safely with good intermediate outcomes in elderly, high-risk patients.

Objectives Rapid-deployment valves can reduce procedural times and may facilitate minimally invasive surgery. In our institution, more than 500 patients underwent rapid deployment aortic valve replacement (AVR). Methods A total of 510 patients underwent rapid deployment AVR between March 2012 and September 2017, of whom 270 patients underwent isolated AVR and 240 underwent AVR with concomitant procedures. The cumulative follow-up time was 1,444 patient-years, the median follow-up time 2.8 years, respectively Results An early all-cause mortality of 3.5% (n = 18) was seen with a cumulative survival of 91.9 ± 2.2% after 12 months. Mean cross-clamp times were 37 ± 19 minutes for isolated AVR and 93 ± 29 minutes for AVR with concomitant procedures. The rate of new pacemaker implantation was 7.8% (n = 40). No case of structural degeneration occurred in the follow-up. Three (0.6%) cases of endocarditis were registered. Conclusions Rapid deployment AVR can be performed safely with low complication rates and good hemodynamic results. Therefore, the relevance in aortic valve surgery can be stressed.

Objectives Increased rates of postoperative left bundle branch block (LBBB) and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) frequently occur after implantation of rapid deployment valves. The impact of LBBB on follow-up outcomes remains controversial. So far, no data regarding long-term outcomes exist. Aim The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of LBBB on postoperative outcomes after rapid deployment aortic valve replacement (RDAVR). Methods A total of 620 consecutive patients without preexisting LBBB or PPI who underwent rapid deployment AVR between March 2012 and September 2019 were included. New-onset LBBB was defined as any new LBBB that persisted at hospital discharge. The median follow-up time for clinical data was 1.7 years post-RDAVR. Results At discharge, new-onset LBBB was seen in 109 patients (17.5%). There were no differences between the LBBB groups and no-LBBB groups regarding baseline characteristics. At a median follow-up of 1.7 years, no difference was found between LBBB groups and no-LBBB groups concerning all-cause mortality (12.8 vs. 11.7%; hazard ratio [HR]: 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.74–1.53; p = 0.54). Nevertheless, new-onset LBBB was associated with significant higher pacemaker implantation rates at follow-up (10.1 vs. 6.3%; HR: 3.58; 95% CI: 1.89–6.81 p < 0.001). Conclusion After a median follow-up of 1.7 years, new-onset LBBB was not associated with increased mortality. Nevertheless, higher pacemaker implantation rates were observed in patients with new-onset LBBB after RDAVR. The clinical registration number is DRKS 00012950. IRB approval was obtained on October 15, 2015—Reg. Nr.: 15–5359. The authors confirm that they had full freedom of investigation, full control of the design of the study, methods used, outcome parameters and results, analysis of data, and production of the written report. M.S. and D.U. contributed to study design, data analysis, interpretation, and writing of the manuscript. Both equally contributed to this work. P.H. contributed to data collection. H.N. contributed to data analysis and V.M. contributed to literature search. M.B. and J.S. contributed to data interpretation and review of the manuscript. ^* These authors contributed equally to this study. Received: 18 July 2021 Accepted: 26 November 2021 Publication Date: 02 February 2022 (online) © 2022. Thieme. All rights reserved. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

Background/Objectives: Severe obesity significantly increases the risk of complications following full sternotomy in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). However, these patients are frequently excluded from less invasive, sternum-sparing surgical alternatives. This study aimed to assess the safety and practicality of a newly developed technique—Total Coronary Revascularization via left Anterior miniThoracotomy (TCRAT)—that avoids sternotomy in patients with severe obesity requiring multivessel CABG. Methods: From November 2019 to May 2024, a total of 502 non-emergency patients with multivessel coronary artery disease underwent CABG through a left anterior minithoracotomy using cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and cardioplegic arrest. Of these, 43 patients with a body mass index (BMI) exceeding 35.0 kg/m² were classified as severely obese and included for subgroup analysis. Their outcomes were compared to those of the remaining 459 patients with BMI below 35.0 kg/m². Key intraoperative variables—such as total operative time, CPB duration, aortic cross-clamp time, and graft strategy—were evaluated. Postoperative outcomes, such as the incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, minor complications, and length of stay in ICU and hospital, were also analyzed. Results: Severely obese patients exhibited a longer total operation time (353.5 ± 83.6 min vs. 320.4 ± 73.4 min, p < 0.05). In contrast, no statistical differences were observed in aortic cross-clamp time (97.9 ± 27.6 min vs. 95.6 ± 33.0 min; p = 0.307) or CPB time (163.3 ± 35.0 min vs. 155.0 ± 42.9 min; p = 0.078). Both groups received a similar number of distal anastomoses (3.1 ± 0.7 vs. 3.0 ± 0.8; p = 0.194), and the frequency of total arterial revascularization was comparable (34.9% vs. 40.0%; p = 0.268). There were no differences between the groups in major complications, including hospital mortality (2.3% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.227), stroke (0.0% vs. 0.6% p = 0.300), or need for re-revascularization (0.0% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.248). Similarly, minor complications, such as wound healing issues (2.3% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.233) and revisions for bleeding (4.6% vs. 7.2%, p = 0.276), were comparable between groups. ICU stay (2.7 ± 4.5 days vs. 2.2 ± 4.0 days; p = 0.225) and total hospital stay (12.3 ± 9.6 days vs. 10.8 ± 8.6 days; p = 0.142) showed no meaningful differences. Conclusions: TCRAT can be performed safely and effectively in severely obese patients, providing a feasible minimally invasive option for complete coronary revascularization in cases of multivessel disease. This approach eliminates the complications associated with sternotomy, making it a valuable surgical alternative for this high-risk patient group.

We present a case of a 67-year-old patient referred to our department with a pericardial mass lesion measuring 11 × 4 × 7.5 cm as diagnosed in computed tomography scan. The patient showed a history of progredient dyspnea. Video-assisted thoracoscopy as well as an explorative full sternotomy to resect the mass lesion had been performed at the referring hospital subsequently before admission to our department. Intermittent hemodynamic instability caused the procedure to stop and a transfer to the cardiothoracic surgery department, following which a resternotomy was performed. Inspection of the surgical site and subsequent intraoperative rapid section revealed an old organized and dense pericardial hematoma adherent to the right ventricle. The suspicion of covered coronary artery perforation led to an intraoperative coronary angiography, which revealed a large proximal coronary aneurysm of the right coronary artery and a subtotal stenosis of the circumflex branch. The hematoma could be removed with decompression of the right ventricle under cardiopulmonary bypass conditions. The further postoperative course was uncomplicated with retransfer to the referring hospital on the postoperative day 8.