Minimally Invasive Approaches Are Safe for Concomitant Mitral and Tricuspid Valve Surgery.

OBJECTIVE:The need for concomitant tricuspid surgery during mitral valve surgery is associated with higher operative risk. We hypothesized that concomitant tricuspid surgery through a minimally invasive thoracotomy (MICS) is associated with noninferior risk compared with a sternotomy. METHODS:All patients undergoing mitral valve surgery at a single institution (2010 to 2020) were evaluated. After excluding endocarditis, emergent operations, and concomitant aortic valve or coronary artery bypass grafting procedures, patients were stratified by MICS versus sternotomy. Multivariable logistic regression assessed the risk-adjusted association between concomitant tricuspid valve procedure and Society of Thoracic Surgeons major morbidity or mortality. An interaction term evaluated the impact of approach on concomitant tricuspid surgery. RESULTS:A total of 772 patients underwent mitral valve surgery, including 138 (17.9%) with concomitant tricuspid valve operation. Of the total cohort, 243 patients (31.5%) underwent the MICS approach. Concomitant tricuspid operation was performed in 104 sternotomy patients (19.7%) compared with 34 MICS patients (14.0%, P = 0.056). After risk adjustment, patients who underwent concomitant tricuspid valve surgery via sternotomy had nearly 2 times greater odds of morbidity and mortality relative to those undergoing isolated mitral surgery via sternotomy (adjOR = 1.86, P = 0.049), while patients who underwent concomitant tricuspid surgery via the MICS approach had no increased risk of the composite outcome (adjOR = 0.66, P = 0.543), relative to isolated mitral surgery via MICS approach. CONCLUSIONS:Concomitant tricuspid surgery at the time of mitral valve surgery carries additional risk in a broad patient population. A minimally invasive approach appears to be safe for selected patients requiring concomitant tricuspid valve surgery.