Browsing by Subject "congenital heart defects"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Borrowing from Adult Cardiac Surgeons-Bringing Congenital Heart Surgery Up to Speed in the Minimally Invasive Era.
    (Innovations (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2020-03) Alsarraj, Mohammed K; Nellis, Joseph R; Vekstein, Andrew M; Andersen, Nicholas D; Turek, Joseph W
    The majority of congenital and adult cardiac surgery is performed through a median sternotomy. For surgeons, this incision provides excellent exposure; however, for patients, a median sternotomy confers a poorer cosmetic outcome and the possibility of postoperative respiratory dysfunction, chronic pain, and deep sternal wound infections. Despite the advances in adult cardiac surgery, the use of minimally invasive techniques in pediatric patients is largely limited to small case series and less complex repairs. In this article, we review the risks, benefits, and limitations of the minimally invasive congenital cardiac approaches being performed today. The interest in these approaches continues to grow as more data supporting reduced morbidity, decreased length of stay, and faster recovery are published. In the future, as the technology and surgical familiarity improve, these alternative approaches will become more common, and may someday become the standard of care.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Surgical Valvotomy Versus Balloon Valvuloplasty for Congenital Aortic Valve Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
    (J Am Heart Assoc, 2016-08-08) Hill, Garick D; Ginde, Salil; Rios, Rodrigo; Frommelt, Peter C; Hill, Kevin D
    BACKGROUND: Optimal initial treatment for congenital aortic valve stenosis in children remains unclear between balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) and surgical aortic valvotomy (SAV). METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a contemporary systematic review and meta-analysis to compare survival in children with congenital aortic valve stenosis. Secondary outcomes included frequency of at least moderate regurgitation at hospital discharge as well as rates of aortic valve replacement and reintervention. Single- and dual-arm studies were identified by a search of PubMed (Medline), Embase, and the Cochrane database. Overall 2368 patients from 20 studies were included in the analysis, including 1835 (77%) in the BAV group and 533 (23%) in the SAV group. There was no difference between SAV and BAV in hospital mortality (OR=0.98, 95% CI 0.5-2.0, P=0.27, I(2)=22%) or frequency of at least moderate aortic regurgitation at discharge (OR=0.58, 95% CI 0.3-1.3, P=0.09, I(2)=54%). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no difference in long-term survival or freedom from aortic valve replacement but significantly more reintervention in the BAV group (10-year freedom from reintervention of 46% [95% CI 40-52] for BAV versus 73% [95% CI 68-77] for SAV, P<0.001). Results were unchanged in a sensitivity analysis restricted to infants (<1 year of age). CONCLUSIONS: Although higher rates of reintervention suggest improved outcomes with SAV, indications for reintervention may vary depending on initial intervention. When considering the benefits of a less-invasive approach, and clinical equipoise with respect to more clinically relevant outcomes, these findings support the need for a randomized controlled trial.