08/20/2024
Minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) is a revolutionary innovation in the context of cardiac surgeries that is rapidly replacing conventional open heart surgeries. This minimally invasive surgery makes it possible for surgeons to operate the heart through small incisions compared to normal surgical operations, hence reducing the impact of the operation on the body. In this blog, we will look into benefits as well as risks associated with minimally invasive cardiac surgery.
Understanding Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery
MICS employs complex techniques and small instruments to perform surgeries through 2-4 inch incisions. This approach allows surgeons to handle various heart procedures, including CABG, mitral valve repair, and aortic valve replacement, with less impact on the patient's body. High-definition cameras and precision tools make these intricate operations possible with minimal harm compared to traditional open-heart surgery.
High-definition cameras and precision instruments enable surgeons to carry out intricate operations in a similar manner as in the usually invasive open-heart surgery, except that the procedure does not cause much harm to the anatomy of the patient. The less invasive nature of MICS clearly improves the experience for both surgeons and patients in several ways.
Benefits Of Minimally Invasive Heart Surgery
Some of major benefits associated with minimally invasive cardiac surgery procedure are:
Smaller Incisions:
This has been seen to be one major strength of MICS since it involves the use of very small cuts. When compared to the complete division of the sternum, patients are subjected to a range of operations that have less postoperative pain, thus giving the patient a fast recovery period. The techniques that can allow lesser incision mean that the cicatricial lines after the operations are also small, which is important for those patients who are concerned with how they will look after the operation.
Reduced Blood Loss:
The use of less invasive approaches and improvements in surgery that characterize MICS usually lead to lesser blood loss throughout the process. This has the effect of decreasing the amount of bleeding that may require blood transfusions, which have their risks—an allergic reaction, for example, or an infection.
Quicker Recovery:
Another reason that MICS is valuable is that the recovery time tends to be shorter for the patients who have experienced it. The fact is the physical strain is much less, and patients are generally able to resume their regular activities and work more quickly than those who have had open-heart surgery. This faster recovery does not only improve the quality of life of the patient but also has a beneficial effect on the economy because it cuts down on costs associated with hospital stays in addition to additional days of rehabilitation.
Lower Risk of Complications:
MICS causes less harm to the patient compared to other open-heart operations, and some of the possible severe complications include wound infection, stroke, or respiratory-related problems.This technique reduces the extent of cutting, which lowers the impact on the immune system, shortens the recovery period, and decreases the incidence of complications.
Improved Quality of Life:
There is less pain felt by the patient, faster recovery, and reduced complication rate, which all result in an improved quality of life for the patients. Patients can return to normal activities with less interference and have a more comfortable postoperative period.
Risks Of Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery
While MICS offers many advantages, it is not without its risks. Understanding these potential risks is crucial for patients considering this surgical option.
Conversion to Open Surgery:
At times, the degree of difficulty of the operation or some concerns that may arise during the surgery may require the conversion from minimally invasive cardiac surgery to conventional open heart surgery. This conversion can prolong the time of surgery and enhance the time required for recovery.
Internal Bleeding:
In MICS there is always a probability of internal bleeding during or after the surgery, but the risk is comparatively less than that in open-heart surgery. This is another risk that surgeons go to considerable lengths to avoid, but it remains nonetheless a factor.
Infection:
Like many surgeries, there are always chances that the patient may develop an infection either in the area of surgery or internally. However, minor incisions that are usually employed in MICS make the occurrence of infections comparatively smaller than in traditional surgery. Most patients are prescribed antibiotics to prevent episodes of infection during their hospital stay, but great care must be taken during the postoperative period.
Stroke:
The occurrence of postoperative stroke is low but is present in every MICS case, especially if the lesion is near the brain. The risk is similar to open-heart surgery, and exacting care is taken to avoid it.
Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery Vs Open Heart Surgery
|
Feature |
Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery (MICS) | Open-Heart Surgery |
|---|---|---|
| Incisions | Small, 2-4 inches | Large, typically 6-12 inches, often requiring the breastbone (sternum) to be split |
| Surgery Time | Generally shorter, often 2-4 hours | Longer, often 4-8 hours |
| Blood Loss | Less, typically requiring fewer blood transfusions | More, often requiring multiple blood transfusions |
| Recovery Time | Faster, patients can often return home within a week | Slower, patients may need to stay in the hospital for several weeks |
| Hospital Stay | Shorter, typically 3-7 days | Longer, typically 7-14 days |
| Risk of Complications | Lower, but still present (e.g., infection, stroke, internal bleeding) | Higher, including increased risk of infection, stroke, heart attack, and respiratory problems |
| Cost | Potentially higher due to specialized equipment and techniques | Generally lower |
| Suitability | Best for certain heart conditions, such as mitral valve repair, aortic valve replacement, and atrial fibrillation | Suitable for a wider range of heart conditions, including coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and complex heart defects |
Choosing The Right Procedure
The guidelines for choosing between MICS and open-heart surgery depend on several factors, such as the general health of the patient, the condition of the heart that requires surgery, and the ability of the surgeons performing the surgery. Patients such as those suffering from severe coronary artery disease or previous cardiac surgery are not suitable for MICS surgery. On the other hand, those who have relatively simple heart complications stand to so much from the relatively less invasive procedure.
Patients should have an in-depth discussion and talk with their cardiologist and cardiac surgeon to know the advantages and disadvantages of the procedure.
Conclusion
Less invasive or minimal access cardiac surgery represents another effective, less traumatic method in contrast to open heart surgery. The described advantages, such as the shortened period of recovery, the decreased rate of possible complications, and the enhancement of the quality of life, amount to the consideration of MICS as one of the options for performing surgeries. Patients should carefully weigh their risks and discuss with healthcare professionals to determine which surgery fits them best.