Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Patricia Ursomanno

Publications and source records attributed to Patricia Ursomanno.

5 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2003

Minimally invasive aortic valve surgery in the elderly: a case-control study.

INTRODUCTION: Although minimally invasive aortic valve surgery (MIAVR) is performed in many centers, few studies have compared its results to a standard sternotomy (SS) approach. We assessed the hypothesis that, when compared with SS in the elderly population, MIAVR has similar morbidity and mortality and allows faster hospital recovery. METHODS AND RESULTS: From January 1995 through February 2002, 515 patients over age 65 underwent isolated aortic valve replacement. Using data gathered prospectively, 189 MIAVR patients were matched with 189 SS patients by age, ventricular function, valvular pathology, urgency of operation, diabetes, previous cardiac surgery, renal disease, and history of stroke. In each group, 56.1% of patients underwent non-elective procedures, and 28% were >or=80 years old. Hospital mortality (6.9%) and freedom from postoperative morbidity (82.5% versus 81.5%, P=0.79) were similar. Multivariate analysis revealed that urgent procedures [Odds Ratio (OR)=3.97; P=0.03], congestive heart failure (OR=3.94; P=0.03), and ejection fraction <30% (OR=4.16; P=0.03) were significant predictors of hospital mortality. Prolonged length of stay was associated with age (P=0.05), preoperative stroke (OR=3.5,P=0.001), CHF (OR=2.2, P=0.004), and sternotomy approach (OR=2.3,P=0.002) by multivariate analysis. More MIAVR patients were discharged home (52.6% versus 38.6%,P=0.03) rather than to rehabilitation facilities. Three year actuarial survival revealed no difference between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive aortic valve surgery is safe in elderly patients, with morbidity and mortality comparable to sternotomy approach. The shorter hospital stay and greater percentage of patients discharged home after MIAVR reflect enhanced recovery with this technique.

Aged↗
PubMed2002

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery: a 6-year experience with 714 patients.

BACKGROUND: This study analyzes a single institutional experience with minimally invasive mitral valve operations of 6 years, reviewing short-term morbidity and mortality and long-term echocardiographic follow-up data. METHODS: Seven hundred fourteen consecutive patients had minimally invasive mitral valve procedures between November 1995 and November 2001; concomitant procedures included 91 multiple valves and 18 coronary artery bypass grafts. Of these 714 patients, 561 patients had isolated mitral valve operations (375 repairs, 186 replacements). Mean age was 58.3 years (range, 14 to 96 years; 30.1% > 70 years), and 15.4% of patients had previous cardiac operations. Arterial cannulation was femoral in 79.0% and central in 21%, with the port access balloon endo-occlusion used in 82.3%. Cardioplegia was transjugular retrograde (54.1%) or antegrade (29.4%). Right anterior minithoracotomy was used in 96.6% and left posterior minithoracotomy in 2.2%. RESULTS: Hospital mortality for primary isolated mitral valve repair was 1.1% and 5.8% for isolated mitral valve replacement. Overall hospital mortality was 4.2% (30 of 714). Mean cross-clamp time was 92 minutes and mean cardiopulmonary bypass time was 127 minutes. Postoperatively, median ventilation time was 11 hours, intensive care unit time was 19 hours, and total hospital stay was 6 days. Complications for all patients included permanent neurologic deficit (2.9%), aortic dissection (0.3%); there was no mediastinal infection (0.0%). Follow-up echocardiography demonstrated 89.1% of the repair patients had only trace or no residual mitral insufficiency. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the minimally invasive port access approach to mitral valve operations is reproducible with low perioperative morbidity and mortality and with late outcomes that are equivalent to conventional operations.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2002

Evolving techniques for mitral valve reconstruction.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effectiveness of new techniques of mitral valve reconstruction (MVR) that have evolved over the last decade, such as aggressive anterior leaflet repair and minimally invasive surgery using an endoaortic balloon occluder. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: MVR via conventional sternotomy has been an established treatment for mitral insufficiency for over 20 years, primarily for the treatment of patients with posterior leaflet prolapse. METHODS: Between June 1980 and June 2001, 1,195 consecutive patients had MVR with ring annuloplasty. Conventional sternotomy was used in 843 patients, minimally invasive surgery in 352 (since June 1996). Anterior leaflet repair was performed in 374 patients, with increasing use over the last 10 years. Follow-up was 100% complete (mean 4.6 years, range 0.5-20.5). RESULTS: Hospital mortality was 4.7% overall and 1.4% for isolated MVR (1.1% for minimally invasive surgery vs. 1.6% for conventional sternotomy; =.4). Multivariate analysis showed the factors predictive of increased operative risk to be age, NYHA functional class, concomitant procedures, and previous cardiac surgery. The 5-year results for freedom from cardiac death, reoperation, and valve-related complications among the 782 patients with degenerative etiology are, respectively, as follows ( >.05 for all end points): for anterior leaflet repair, 93%, 94%, 90%; for no anterior leaflet repair, 91%, 92%, 91%; for minimally invasive surgery, 97%, 89%, 93%; and for conventional sternotomy, 93%, 94%, 90%. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that late results of MVR after minimally invasive surgery and after anterior leaflet repair are equivalent to those achievable with conventional sternotomy and posterior leaflet repair. These options significantly expand the range of patients suitable for mitral valve repair surgery and give further evidence to support wider use of minimally invasive techniques.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Minimally invasive reoperative isolated valve surgery: early and mid-term results.

OBJECTIVE: Minimally invasive, nonsternotomy approaches for valve procedures may reduce the risks associated with cardiac surgery after prior sternotomy and may improve outcomes. We analyzed our institutional experience to test this hypothesis. METHODS: Between 1995 and 2002, 498 patients with previous cardiac operations via sternotomy underwent isolated valve surgery: 337 via median sternotomy (aortic = 160; mitral = 177) and 161 via mini-thoracotomy (aortic = 61; mitral = 100). Data were collected prospectively using the New York State Cardiac Surgery Report Form. RESULTS: Preoperative incidences of congestive heart failure, renal disease, and nonelective procedures were higher in the sternotomy group. Hospital mortality was significantly lower with the minimally invasive approach, 5.6% (9/161) versus 11.3% (38/337) (univariate, p = 0.04). However, multivariate analysis (odds ratio: 95% confidence intervals, p value) revealed that chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (6.6: 1.4 to 3.1, p = 0.001), renal disease (4.1: 1.52 to 11.2, p = 0.01), cerebrovascular disease (2.2: 1.03 to 4.78, p = 0.04), and ejection faction <30% (1.5: 0.96 to 5.5, p = 0.06) were associated with increased mortality. While mean bypass time, cross-clamp times, and stroke rates were comparable between groups, patients undergoing minimally invasive valve surgery had no deep wound infections (0% vs 2.4%, p = 0.05), less need for blood products (p = 0.02), and shorter hospital stays (p = 0.009). Five-year survival was higher with minimally invasive techniques as compared to a sternotomy approach (92.4 +/- 2% and 86.0 +/- 2%, respectively, p = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Reoperative valve surgery can be safely performed using a nonsternotomy, minimally invasive approach, with at least equal mortality, less hospital morbidity, decreased hospital length of stay, and slightly favorable mid-term survival as compared to sternotomy.

Adolescent↗