{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028182701652089408, 'fraction_numerical': 0.038872691933916424, 'mean_word_length': 4.754189944134078, '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}}
Minimal vs Median Sternotomy for Aortic Valve Replacement

The aim of this study was to compare postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement through a ministernotomy or conventional sternotomy. Sixty patients were randomized into 2 groups of 30 each: group 1 had a full sternotomy and group 2 had a ministernotomy. Pain was evaluated on a daily basis, pulmonary function tests were performed perioperatively. The skin incision was shorter in group 2 (7.17 vs 24.50 cm in group 1). There was significantly less mediastinal drainage in group 2 (233 vs 590 mL in 24 hours in group 1). Group 1 patients had more blood transfusions and longer ventilation time. In group 1, 96.7% experienced severe pain, whereas 93.3% in group 2 reported minimal pain. Hospital stay was 17.7 days in group 1 and 8.0 days in group 2. The ministernotomy had a cosmetic advantage, less blood loss and transfusion requirement, greater sternal stability, better respiratory function, and earlier extubation and hospital discharge.