Mini-sternotomy versus conventional sternotomy for aortic valve replacement: a randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open. 2021 Jan 29;11(1):e041398. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041398.

Abstract

Objective: To compare clinical and health economic outcomes after manubrium-limited mini-sternotomy (intervention) and conventional median sternotomy (usual care).

Design: A single-blind, randomised controlled trial.

Setting: Single centre UK National Health Service tertiary hospital.

Participants: Adult patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) surgery.

Interventions: Intervention was manubrium-limited mini-sternotomy performed using a 5-7 cm midline incision. Usual care was median sternotomy performed using a midline incision from the sternal notch to the xiphisternum.

Primary and secondary outcome measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who received a red cell transfusion postoperatively and within 7 days of index surgery. Secondary outcomes included proportion of patients receiving a non-red cell blood component transfusion and number of units transfused within 7 days and during index hospital stay, quality of life and cost-effectiveness analyses.

Results: 270 patients were randomised, received surgery and contributed to the intention to treat analysis. No difference between mini and conventional sternotomy in red-cell transfusion within 7 days was found; 23/135 patients in each arm received a transfusion, OR 1.0 (95% CI 0.5 to 2.0) and risk difference 0.0 (95% CI -0.1 to 0.1). Mini-sternotomy reduced chest drain losses (mean 181.6 mL (SD 138.7) vs conventional, mean 306·9 mL (SD 348.6)); this did not reduce red-cell transfusions. Mean valve size and postoperative valve function were comparable between mini-sternotomy and conventional groups; 23 mm vs 24 mm and 6/134 moderate or severe aortic regurgitation vs 3/130, respectively. Mini-sternotomy resulted in longer bypass (82.7 min (SD 23.5) vs 59.6 min (SD 15.1)) and cross-clamp times (64.1 min (SD 17.1) vs 46·3 min (SD 10.7)). Conventional sternotomy was more cost-effective with only a 5.8% probability of mini-sternotomy being cost-effective at a willingness to pay of £20 000/QALY (Quality Adjusted Life Years).

Conclusions: AVR via mini-sternotomy did not reduce red blood cell transfusion within 7 days following surgery when compared with conventional sternotomy.

Trial registration number: ISRCTN29567910; Results.

Keywords: adult intensive & critical care; adult surgery; cardiac surgery; clinical trials; health economics.

Publication types

  • Randomized Controlled Trial
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aortic Valve* / surgery
  • Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation*
  • Humans
  • Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures
  • Quality of Life
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Single-Blind Method
  • State Medicine
  • Sternotomy
  • Treatment Outcome

Associated data

  • ISRCTN/ISRCTN29567910