{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04416243654822335, 'fraction_numerical': 0.03401015228426396, 'mean_word_length': 5.159375, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Robotic mitral valve repair for degenerative posterior leaflet prolapse.

BACKGROUND
Robotic mitral valve (MV) repair is the least invasive surgical approach to the MV and provides unparalleled access to the valve. We sought to assess technical aspects and clinical outcomes of robotic MV repair for isolated posterior leaflet prolapse by examining the first 623 such cases performed in a tertiary care center.


METHODS
We reviewed the first 623 patients (mean age 56±9.7 years) with isolated posterior leaflet prolapse who underwent robotic primary MV repair from 01/2006 to 11/2013. All procedures were performed via right chest access with femoral perfusion for cardiopulmonary bypass.


RESULTS
MV repair was attempted in all patients; 622 (99.8%) underwent MV repair and only 1 (0.2%) converted to replacement. After an initial attempt at robotic MV repair, 8 (1.3%) patients were converted to sternotomy as a result of management of residual mitral regurgitation (n=3), bleeding (n=1), difficulties with surgical exposure (n=2), aortic valve injury (n=1), and aortic dissection (n=1). Intraoperative post-repair echocardiography confirmed that all patients left the operating room with MR graded as mild or less, and pre-discharge echocardiography confirmed mild or less MR in 573 (99.1%). There was no hospital death, sternal wound infection, or renal failure. Seven (1.1%) patients suffered a stroke, 11 (1.8%) patients underwent re-exploration for bleeding, and 111 (19%) experienced new-onset atrial fibrillation. The mean intensive care unit length of stay and hospital length of stay were 29±17 hours and 4.6±1.6 days, respectively.


CONCLUSIONS
At a large tertiary care referral center, robotic MV repair for posterior prolapse is associated with zero mortality, infrequent operative morbidity, and near 100% successful repair. The combination of a patient selection algorithm and increased experience improved clinical outcomes and procedural efficiency.