Araştırma Çıktıları

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://hdl.handle.net/11443/931

Browse

Author: search.filters.author.Senay, SahinSubject: search.filters.subject.valve repair

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Robotic-assisted cardiac surgery without aortic cross-clamping: A safe alternative approach
    (WILEY, 2021-01-01) Gullu, Ahmet Umit; Senay, Sahin; Ersin, Egemen; Demirhisar, Onder; Whitham, Tarik; Kocyigit, Muharrem; Alhan, Cem
    Background and Aim Attempting to place an aortic cross-clamp may complicate surgery and postoperative outcomes in patients who have mediastinal adhesions or in those with extensive aortic calcification. Although right-sided cardiac surgery via thoracotomy is not a new technique in these patients, robotic-assisted intracardiac repair without cross-clamping was not reported in a large group of patients previously. In this study, the safety of robotic-assisted cardiac surgery without aortic cross-clamping was examined. Methods From January 2010 to March 2020, 304 patients underwent robotic-assisted cardiac surgery in our center and in 25 of these patients (8.2\%) with a mean age of 65.5 +/- 20 years myocardial protection was succeeded with moderate hypothermic ventricular fibrillatory arrest. Severe pericardial adhesions or existence of highly calcified ascending aorta were the indications for fibrillatory arrest during robotic assistant surgery. Results Most patients were in New York Heart Association Class >= II (88.0\%) and the mean logistic Euroscore value was 18.5 +/- 22.3. The type of operations were mitral/tricuspid valve repair/replacement, cryoablation, atrial septal defect closure, and pericardiectomy. Cardiopulmonary bypass times were 141.5 +/- 47 (minimum 77-maximum 252) min. There was no case of conversion to open thoracotomy or sternotomy. Hemiparesis was observed in one patient. Two patients with 78.2 and 81.9 Euroscore values had mesenteric ischemia and multiorgan failure, respectively, and died at postoperative period. Conclusions Robotic-assisted cardiac surgery without cross-clamping may provide reasonable outcomes in patients with severe aortic calcification or mediastinal adhesions undergoing intracardiac repair. These acceptable outcomes may encourage surgeons to perform this approach in appropriate group of patients.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    An analysis of the learning curve for robotic-assisted mitral valve repair
    (WILEY, 2021-01-01) Gullu, Ahmet U.; Senay, Sahin; Kocyigit, Muharrem; Zencirci, Ertugrul; Akyol, Ahmet; Degirmencioglu, Aleks; Karakus, Gultekin; Ersin, Egemen; Karabiber, Alara; Alhan, Cem
    Background Many cardiac surgeons receive training for sternotomy-based cardiac surgical operations in residency programs and only a few education programs offer training specifically in minimally invasive cardiac surgery. In this report, we aimed to search and analyze the learning curve for robotic-assisted mitral valve (MV) repair in cardiac surgeons. Method Between January 2010 and July 2019, 60 robotic-assisted isolated MV repair surgeries were performed with DaVinci Robotic Systems in our center. Different kinds of surgical techniques were used. The assessment of the learning curve was based on cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and transthoracic aortic clamp (CC) times. Result There were 23 (38.3\%) men and 37 (61.7\%) women with a mean age of 48.3 years. The lesions of the MV were posterior leaflet prolapsus (n = 42, 70.0\%), anterior leaflet prolapsus (n = 8, 13.3\%), Barlow disease (n = 3, 5\%), and annular dilatation (n = 7, 11.6\%). The patients underwent notochordal implantation (n = 27, 45\%), quadrangular or triangular resection (n = 23, 38.3\%), isolated ring annuloplasty (n = 7, 11.7\%), resection, and leaflet reduction (n = 2, 3.3\%) or edge to edge repair (n = 1, 1.7\%). The maturation of the learning curve appeared to be about 30 cases. The statistical analysis showed that the mean CPB and CC times for the first 30 cases were greater compared with the 30 after learning curve (155.3 vs. 118.9 min {[}p = .00], 102.3 vs. 80 min {[}p = .00], respectively). There was no case of conversion to open surgery. No perioperative mortality was observed. Conclusion The maturation of the learning curve for robotic-assisted MV repair appeared to be about 30 cases in our group of patients. This study had encouraging results for surgeons who desire to start a robotic mitral surgery program.