Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement has been established in many centres over the last decade. Although numerous modifications have been described to date, these solely involve variations of the utilized operative incision. Total miniaturized cardiopulmonary bypass (tMCPB) offers the theoretical potential of reducing even further the overall procedural “invasiveness”. We describe our initial experience of an application of MCPB for aortic valve replacement through a minimal incision.
1 Cosgrove DM Sabik JF . Minimally invasive approach for aortic valve operations. Ann Thorac Surg1996; 62: 596–597.
2.
2 Bakir I Casselman FP Wellens F . Minimally invasive versus standard approach aortic valve replacement: a study in 506 patients. Ann Thorac Surg2006; 81: 1599–1604.
3.
3 Szwerc MF Benckart DH Wiechmann RJ . Partial versus full sternotomy for aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg1999; 68: 2209–2213; discussion 2213–2204.
4.
4 Liu J Sidiropoulos A Konertz W . Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (AVR) compared to standard AVR. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg1999; 16(Suppl. 2): S80–S83.
5.
5 Mihaljevic T Cohn LH Unic D Aranki SF Couper GS Byrne JG . One thousand minimally invasive valve operations: early and late results. Ann Surg2004; 240: 529–534; discussion 534.
6.
6 Mulholland JW Anderson JR Yarham GJ Tuladhur S Saed I Oliver MD . Miniature cardiopulmonary bypass-the Hammersmith experience. Perfusion2007; 22: 161–166.
7.
7 Bical OM Fromes Y Gaillard D . Comparison of the inflammatory response between miniaturized and standard CPB circuits in aortic valve surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg2006; 29: 699–702.
8.
8 Castiglioni A Verzini A Pappalardo F . Minimally invasive closed circuit versus standard extracorporeal circulation for aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg2007; 83: 586–591.
9.
9 Mulholland JW Anderson JR . Preventing the loss of safety margins with miniaturized cardiopulmonary bypass. Ann Thorac Surg2006; 82: 1952–1953.
