Background: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols aim to reduce postoperative complications and promote earlier recovery. Although it is well established in noncardiac surgery fields, the ERAS approach has only recently been adopted in cardiac surgery. The aim of this review is to evaluate the status and implementation of ERAS protocols in patients undergoing heart valve surgery and to summarise associated clinical results. Methods: A literature search for the period January 2015 and January 2024 was performed through online databases. Clinical studies (randomised controlled trials and cohort studies) on patients undergoing heart valve surgical procedures and comparing ERAS and conventional approaches were included. The data extracted covered studies and populations characteristics, early outcomes and the features of each ERAS protocol. Results: There were 14 studies that fulfilled the final search criteria and were ultimately included in the review. Overall, 5142 patients were identified in the 14 studies, with 2501 in ERAS groups and 2641 patients who were representative of control groups. Seven experiences exclusively included patients who underwent heart valve surgery. Twelve out of fourteen protocols involved multiple interventions from the preoperative to postoperative phase, while two studies reported actions limited to intraoperative and postoperative care. We found high heterogeneity among the included protocols regarding key actions targeted for improvement and measured outcomes. All the studies showed that ERAS pathways can be safely adopted in cardiac surgery and in most of the experiences were associated with shorter mechanical ventilation time, reduced postoperative opioid use and reduced ICU and hospital stays. Conclusions: As demonstrated in noncardiac surgery, the adoption of structured ERAS protocols has the potential to improve results in patients undergoing heart valve surgery. Further evidence based on larger populations is needed, including more homogenous pathways and reporting further outcomes in terms of patient satisfaction, recovery and quality of life after surgery.

UNASSIGNED: Minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) is increasing worldwide. In most cases, the surgical technique includes cannulation of the groin for the establishment of cardiopulmonary bypass, requiring a second surgical incision (SC) for exposure and cannulation of the femoral vessels. With the introduction of arterial closure devices, percutaneous cannulation (PC) of the groin has become a possible alternative. We performed a meta-analysis and systematic review to compare clinical endpoints between the patients who underwent PC and SC for MICS.
UNASSIGNED: Three databases were assessed. The primary outcome was any access site complication. Secondary outcomes were perioperative mortality, any wound complication, any vascular complication, lymphatic complications, femoral/iliac stenosis, stroke, procedural duration, and hospital length of stay (LOS). A random effects model was performed.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 5 studies with 2,038 patients were included. When compared with PC, patients who underwent SC showed a higher incidence of any access site complication (odds ratio [OR] = 3.09, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.87 to 5.10, P < 0.01), any wound complication (OR = 10.10, 95% CI: 3.31 to 30.85, P < 0.01), lymphatic complication (OR = 9.37, 95% CI: 2.15 to 40.81, P < 0.01), and longer procedural duration (standardized mean difference = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.51, P < 0.01). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups regarding perioperative mortality, any vascular complication, femoral/iliac stenosis, stroke, or hospital LOS.
UNASSIGNED: The analysis suggests that surgical groin cannulation in MICS is associated with a higher incidence of any access site complication (especially wound complication and lymphatic fistula) and with a longer procedural time compared with PC. There was no difference in perioperative mortality.

BACKGROUND: It is very common for patients with newly diagnosed lung masses to have heart disease. However, papillary fibroelastomas (PFEs) of the tricuspid valve (TV) combined with lung cancer are rarely reported. It is thus unclear whether a two-stage surgery or concomitant surgery is optimal.
METHODS: We report the case of a 73-year-old Chinese male who was diagnosed with PFEs on the TV by transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) examination while being evaluated to undergo video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) for a right lower lung nodule. We resected both the PFEs and the lung nodule via right minithoracotomy. The surgery was uneventful, and histopathology reports confirmed PFEs of the TV and moderately to poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma. The patient recovered uneventfully, and there was no sign of tumor recurrence during 15 months of follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that after careful evaluation, concomitant minimally invasive radical resection of primary lung cancer after cardiac PFE removal is an acceptable and safe treatment strategy and should be performed as soon as possible.

UNASSIGNED: Minimally invasive procedures have been developed to reduce surgical trauma after cardiac surgery. Clinical recovery is the main focus of most research. Still, patient-centred outcomes, such as the quality of life, can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the impact of the surgery on the patient\'s life. This systematic review aims to deliver a detailed summary of all available research investigating the quality of recovery, assessed with quality of life instruments, in adults undergoing minimally invasive cardiac surgery.
UNASSIGNED: All randomised trials, cohort studies, and cross-sectional studies assessing the quality of recovery in patients undergoing minimally invasive cardiac surgery compared to conventional cardiac surgery within the last 20 years were included, and a summary was prepared.
UNASSIGNED: The randomised trial observed an overall improved quality of life after both minimally invasive and conventional surgery. The quality of life improvement in the minimally invasive group showed a faster course and evolved to a higher level than the conventional surgery group. These findings align with the results of prospective cohort studies. In the cross-sectional studies, no significant difference in the quality of life was seen except for one that observed a significantly higher quality of life in the minimally invasive group.
UNASSIGNED: This systematic review indicates that patients may benefit from minimally invasive and conventional cardiac surgery, but patients undergoing minimally invasive cardiac surgery may recover sooner and to a greater extent. However, no firm conclusion could be drawn due to the limited available studies. Therefore, randomised controlled trials are needed.

UNASSIGNED: Robot-assisted surgery is a minimally invasive approach for repairing the mitral valve. This study aimed to assess its safety and clinical efficacy when compared with conventional sternotomy, partial sternotomy, and right minithoracotomy.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic review of peer-reviewed studies comparing robot-assisted mitral valve repair with conventional sternotomy, partial sternotomy, and right minithoracotomy was conducted following Cochrane Collaboration guidelines. Meta-analyses were performed where possible.
UNASSIGNED: The search strategy yielded 15 primary studies, of which 12 compared robot-assisted with conventional sternotomy, 2 compared robot-assisted with partial sternotomy, and 6 compared robot-assisted with right minithoracotomy. The overall quality of evidence was low, and there was a lack of data on long-term outcomes. Individual studies and pooled data demonstrated that robotic procedures were comparable to conventional sternotomy and other minimally invasive approaches with respect to the rates of stroke, renal failure, reoperation for bleeding, and mortality. Robot-assisted mitral valve repair was superior to conventional sternotomy with reduced atrial fibrillation, intensive care unit and hospital stay, pain, time to return to normal activities, and physical functioning at 1 year. However, robot-assisted mitral valve repair had longer cardiopulmonary, aortic cross-clamp, and procedure times compared with all other surgical approaches.
UNASSIGNED: Based on current evidence, robot-assisted mitral valve repair is comparable to other approaches for safety and early postoperative outcomes, despite being associated with longer operative times. Ideally, future studies will be randomized controlled trials that compare between robot-assisted surgery, conventional surgery, and other minimally surgery approaches focusing on hard clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes.

Negative left ventricular (LV) remodeling consequent to acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is characterized by an increase in LV volumes in the presence of a depressed LVEF. In order to restore the shape, size, and function of the LV, operative treatment options to achieve volume reduction and shape reconstruction should be considered. In the past decade, conventional surgical LV reconstruction through a full median sternotomy has evolved towards a hybrid transcatheter and less invasive LV reconstruction. In order to perform a safe and effective hybrid LV reconstruction, thorough knowledge of the technical considerations and adequate use of multimodality imaging both pre- and intraoperatively are fundamental. In addition, a comprehensive understanding of the individual procedural steps from both a cardiological and surgical point of view is required.

Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation via lateral thoracotomy can offer similar effectiveness to conventional approaches with less perioperative adverse events. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the potential benefits of lateral thoracotomy (LT) for LVAD implantation compared to median sternotomy.
We searched MEDLINE and Embase databases for studies comparing continuous-flow LVAD implantation using LT with conventional sternotomy. Main outcomes were perioperative mortality and complications.
Twenty-five observational studies enrolling 3072 patients were included with a median follow-up of 10 months. Perioperative mortality (30 day or in-hospital) was 7% (LT) and 14% (sternotomy); however, mortality differences were no longer statistically significant in matched/adjusted studies (RR:0.86; 95%CI:0.52-1.44; p = 0.58). LT was associated with decreased need for blood product transfusions (mean difference[MD]: -4.7; 95%CI: -7.2 to -2.3 units; p < 0.001), reoperation for bleeding (RR:0.34; 95%CI:0.22-0.54; p < 0.001), postoperative RVAD implantation (RR:0.53; 95%CI:0.36-0.77; p < 0.001), days requiring inotropes (MD: -1.1; 95%CI: -2.1 to -0.03 inotrope days; p = 0.04), ICU (MD: -3.3; 95%CI: -6.0 to -0.7 ICU days; p = 0.01), and hospital length of stay (MD: -5.1; 95%CI: -10.1 to -0.1 hospital days; p = 0.04) in matched/adjusted studies. Overall mortality during follow-up was significantly lower for LT in unmatched/unadjusted studies but not statistically significantly lower in matched/adjusted studies (Hazard Ratio:0.82; 95%CI:0.59-1.14; p = 0.24).
LVAD implantation via LT was associated with significantly decreased need for blood products, reoperation for bleeding, and postoperative RVAD implantation. Furthermore, days on inotropic support were also lower, likely contributing to the shorter length of stay. These findings support greater use of a LT approach for carefully selected patients.

OBJECTIVE: Use of minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) is increasing, but to exert its maximum effect on patient outcomes, MICS must be coupled with improved perioperative management, including the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) and fast-track protocols. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of ERAS and fast track in this context.
METHODS: NARRATIVE REVIEW: The authors performed a narrative review that included patients treated with MICS and patients treated with the ERAS/fast-track protocols in the MEDLINE/PubMed database. The keywords ERAS and fast-track were combined with the following key words: minimally invasive cardiac surgery OR robotic cardiac surgery OR minimally invasive mitral surgery OR minimally invasive aortic surgery.
RESULTS: Overall, the authors selected six studies in which either the ERAS or fast-track protocol was applied. The reported adherence to ERAS protocols was high, and neither protocol-related complications nor in-hospital mortality occurred. Patients managed based on ERAS had significantly lower postoperative pain scores, fewer rates of blood transfusions, and shorter hospital and intensive care unit stays compared with those who received standard management. All ERAS patients were managed safely, with early extubation. Similarly, fast-track cardiac surgery, with immediate postprocedure extubation and early transfer to the ward, was shown to be safe, with no increased morbidity or mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: Use of standardized ERAS and fast-track protocols seems to be feasible and safe in the context of MICS, with improved outcomes. Both ERAS and fast track allow for a faster return to full functional status while minimizing perioperative complications.

OBJECTIVE: The scope of application of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery is expanding. However, the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery in the setting of infective endocarditis is not well known. We sought to identify the best evidence available to support a minimally invasive surgical approach for mitral valve infective endocarditis.
METHODS: A systematic review of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery for infective endocarditis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
RESULTS: A total of 6 manuscripts describing 271 patients were identified. Mean age was 60.4 ± 14.9 years old, and 60.1% patients were male. Mean EuroSCORE II was 24.6 ± 23.2. Mitral valve repair was achieved in 32.4% of cases. The average in-hospital mortality was 9.4%, and average length of hospital stay was 21.6 days. Survival was 89.1% at 30 days, and 1-year survival was 79.3%. Rate of conversion to sternotomy was 1.8%. Postoperative complications included: 6.9% postoperative bleeding, 9.3% new postoperative dialysis, 2.3% postoperative stroke, and 3.4% recurrence of endocarditis. Reoperation over the long-term was required in 9.3% of cases.
CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery for infective endocarditis has acceptable perioperative morbidity as well as short- and intermediate-term mortality at experienced centers. Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery may be an acceptable alternative approach to infective endocarditis and warrants further study.

Device closure is the first-line treatment for most atrial septal defects (ASDs). Minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) has been found safe and effective for ASD closure with comparable mortality/morbidity and superior cosmetic results compared to conventional median sternotomy. Our goal was to compare percutaneous versus MICS of ASDs. A systematic review was performed using PubMed and the Cochrane Library (end-of-search date on May 22, 2019). Meta-analyses were conducted using fixed and random effects models. In the present systematic review, we analyzed six studies including 1577 patients with ASDs who underwent either MICS (n = 642) or device closure (n = 935). Treatment efficacy was significantly higher in the MICS (99.8%; 95% CI 98.9-99.9) compared to the device closure group (97.3%; 95% CI 95.6-98.2), (OR 0.1; 95% CI 0.02-0.6). Surgical patients experienced significantly more complications (16.2%; 95% CI 13.0-19.9) compared to those that were treated with a percutaneous approach (7.1%; 95% CI 5.0-9.8), (OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.2-3.2). Surgery was associated with significantly longer length of hospital stay (5.6 ± 1.7 days) compared to device closure (1.3 ± 1.4 days), (OR 4.8; 95% CI 1.1-20.5). Residual shunts were more common with the transcatheter (3.9%; 95% CI 2.7-5.5) compared to the surgical approach (0.95%; 95% CI 0.3-2.4), (OR 0.1; 95% CI 0.06-0.5). There was no difference between the two techniques in terms of major bleeding, hematoma formation, transfusion requirements, cardiac tamponade, new-onset atrial fibrillation, permanent pacemaker placement, and reoperation rates. MICS for ASD is a safe procedure and compares favorably to transcatheter closure. Despite longer hospitalization requirements, the MICS approach is feasible irrespective of ASD anatomy and may lead to a more effective and durable repair.