Main Article Content
The number of aortic valve interventions continues to increase. Although transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) was a milestone in the field, it is quite uncertain whether this technique will completely supplant surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) due to its recognized shortcomings and access limitations. However, TAVR can be considered in short-term the competitor to SAVR and therefore, there is a pressing clinical need for a less invasive SAVR procedure, capable of delivering superior outcomes when compared with TAVR, without the level of invasiveness of current approaches to SAVR.
Different totally endoscopic aortic valve replacement approaches have been described. Nevertheless, we believe that these can be improved and facilitated by cutting-edge technology such as CoreVista® Retractor and CoreVista® Monitor in the surgical field and the feasibility of a single, unique port access centred upon a small transcervical incision to perform the entire procedure. This paper explores the current state of the art and presents detailed how-to-do-it steps for implementing Totally Endoscopic Uniportal SAVR based upon the Transcervical Approach.
The Medical Research Archives grants authors the right to publish and reproduce the unrevised contribution in whole or in part at any time and in any form for any scholarly non-commercial purpose with the condition that all publications of the contribution include a full citation to the journal as published by the Medical Research Archives.
2. Ramlawi B, Ramchandani M, Reardon JM. Surgical Approaches to Aortic Valve Replacement and Repair – Insights and Challenges. Interv Cardiol. 2014;9(1):32-36.
3. Smith CR, Leon MB, Mack MJ et al. Transcatheter versus Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in High-Risk Patients. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(23):2187-2198.
4. Patel KV, Omar W, Gonzalez PE et al. Expansion of TAVR into Low-Risk Patients and Who to Consider for SAVR. Cardiol Ther. 2020; 9(2):377-394.
5. Sharma PS, Subzposh FA, Ellenbogen KA et al. Permanent His-bundle pacing in patients with prosthetic cardiac valves. Heart Rhythm. 2017;14(1):59-64.
6. Leon MB, Mack MJ, Hahn RT et al. Outcomes 2 Years After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients at Low Surgical Risk. J am Coll Cardiol. 2021;77(9):1149-1161.
7. Harky A, Al-Adhami A, Chan SK et al. Minimally Invasive Versus Conventional Aortic Root Replacement – A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Heart Lung Circ. 2019;28(12):1841-1851.
8. Bakir I, Casselman FP, Wellens F et al. Minimally invasive versus standard approach aortic valve replacement: a study in 506 patients. Ann Thorac Surg. 2006;81(5):1599-1604.
9. Pitsis A, Boudoulas H, Boudoulas KD. Operative steps of totally endoscopic aortic valve replacement. Interact Cardiovas Thorac Surg. 2020;31(3):424.
10. Vola M, Fuzellier JF, Campisi S et al. Total endoscopic sutureless aortic valve replacement: rationale, development, perspectives. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2015;4(2):170-174.
11. Nagaoka E, Gelinas J, Vola M, Kiaii B. Early Clinical Experiences of Robotic Assisted Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Valve Stenosis with Sutureless Aortic Valve. Innovations. 2020;15(1):88-92.
12. Balkhy H, Kitahara H. First Human Totally Endoscopic Robotic-Assisted Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement. Ann. Thor. Surg. 2020;109(1):E9-E11
13. Folliguet TA, Vanhuyse F, Konstantinos Z, Laborde F. Early experience with robotic aortic valve replacement Eur. J. Cardio-Thor Surg. 2005;28:172-173
14. Di Eusanio M, Phan K. Sutureless aortic valve replacement. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2015;4(2):123-130.
15. Dapunt OE, Luha O, Ebner A et al. First-in-Man Transcervical Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement Using the CoreVista System. Innovations. 2016;11(2):84-93.
16. White AD, Mushtaq F, Raw RK et al. Does monitor position influence visual-motor performance during minimally invasive surgery? Journal of Surgical Simulation. 2016;3:1-7.
17. Ganguly G, Dixit V, Patrikar S et al. Carbon dioxide insufflation and neurocognitive outcome of open heart surgery. Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann. 2015;23(7):774-780.
18. Kastengren M, Svenarud P, Ahlsson A, Dalen M. Minimally invasive mitral surgery is associated with a low rate of complications. J. Intern. Med. 2019;286(6):614-626.
19. Poffo R, Monanhesi PK, Toschi AP et al. Periareolar Access for Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery: The Brazilian Technique. Innovations. 2018;13(1):65-69.
20. Kompatscher P, Schuler C, Beer GM. The Transareolar Incision for Breast Augmentation Revisited. Aesth. Plast. Surg. 2004;28(2):70-74.
21. Calhoun RF, Ritter JH, Guthrie et al. Results of Transcervical Thymectomy for Myasthenia Gravis in 100 Consecutive Patients. Ann. Surg. 1999;230(4):555-61.
22. Ma X, Xia Q, Wang T, Lin Q. Aesthetic principles access thyroidectomy produces the best cosmetic outcomes as assessed using the patient and observer scar assessment scale. BMC Cancer 2017;17(1):654.
23. Auensen A, Hussain AI, Bendz B et al. Morbidity outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement. Open Heart 2017;4(1):e000588.doi:10.1136/openhrt-2017-000588.
24. Barbanti M, Tamburino C, D’Errigo P et al. Five-Year Outcomes of Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement or Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in a Real World Population. Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions 2019;12: 2019;12:e007825.
25. Baron SJ, Wang K, House JA et al. Cost-Effectiveness of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis at Intermediate Risk. Circulation. 2019;139(7):877-888.