Clinical Decision-Making

In today’s 11:30 a.m. session, "Robotic Cardiac Surgery: The Future Is Now," Dr. Tedy Sawma will discuss how mitral regurgitation, increasingly common in aging populations, presents unique challenges for older patients considering surgical treatment options. While mitral valve repair remains an effective solution, the invasiveness of traditional open-heart surgery often discourages both patients and healthcare providers.

In the Outcomes of Robotic Mitral Valve Repair in Patients Older Than 65 Years presentation, study investigators will highlight findings on robotic mitral valve repair in older patients, comparing outcomes with those from traditional median sternotomy. The study evaluates both short-term and long-term outcomes to determine whether robotic surgery offers advantages in recovery, quality of life, long-term survival, and the need for future interventions.

Researchers analyzed data from a cardiovascular surgery database, tracking patients who underwent their first isolated mitral valve repair between 2010 and 2024. They compared the outcomes of robotic procedures with those of traditional median sternotomy surgeries, adjusting for factors like age, gender, and comorbidities.

Primary outcomes included long-term all-cause mortality and the need for reinterventions, while secondary outcomes focused on hospital recovery metrics such as blood transfusions, atrial fibrillation rates, and ICU stay durations.

The findings to be discussed include how robotic mitral valve repair offered short-term advantages over traditional surgery, such as reduced ICU and hospital stays, fewer blood transfusions, and lower rates of postoperative atrial fibrillation. However, no significant differences were observed in long-term survival or the need for future interventions. Both groups maintained excellent physical activity levels and quality of life over the years. These results suggest that robotic mitral valve repair is a viable option for older patients, providing enhanced short-term recovery without compromising long-term outcomes.

A new study sheds light on the challenges of pediatric mitral valve replacement (MVR) and evaluates the potential of the balloon-expandable Melody valve as an alternative to traditional mechanical prostheses. The findings offer important insights for treating young children with small mitral annuli, a population for whom MVR carries significant risks of morbidity and mortality.

A team of researchers, led by Morgan Moroi, MD, New York-Presbyterian/Columbia University Medical Center, conducted a retrospective review of 36 children under 2 years of age who underwent MVR at a single center between 2005 and 2023. Using propensity score matching to minimize baseline differences, the study compared outcomes between 12 patients receiving the Melody valve and 12 patients treated with mechanical prostheses.

The primary outcome was a composite measure of death, transplant, or surgical reintervention on the mitral valve prosthesis. Median follow-up was 1.6 years.

Key Findings

Both groups had similar baseline characteristics, with a median age of 5.2 months and median weight of 6.5 kg at the time of surgery. The study revealed several important differences and similarities in outcomes:

• Hospital Stay: Melody valve patients had shorter hospital stays (median: 20.5 days) compared to mechanical valve patients (median: 59.0 days), though the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.11).
• Mitral Valve Gradients: The Melody valve group had significantly lower mitral valve gradients at discharge (5.5 mmHg vs. 8.7 mmHg, P=0.046).
• Permanent Pacemakers: No patients in the Melody group required a permanent pacemaker, while 41.7% of the mechanical group did (P=0.04).
• Reintervention Rates: Both groups experienced early surgical reinterventions at similar rates (33.3% vs. 25%, P=1.00).
• Survival Outcomes: At 1 and 3 years, transplant-free survival was comparable between the groups, with no significant difference (P=0.92).
   

Implications 

The findings suggest that the Melody valve offers several advantages over mechanical prostheses in young children with small mitral annuli, including lower rates of permanent pacemaker insertion and no need for lifelong anticoagulation. While early reintervention rates were high across both groups, the Melody valve demonstrated equivalent survival outcomes and may provide a safer and more effective option for this vulnerable patient population. However, the study authors emphasize the need for further research with larger cohorts and longer follow-up to confirm these promising results.
 

A groundbreaking study to be presented at the 2025 Society of Thoracic Surgeons Annual Meeting sheds light on an important decision point for patients requiring aortic valve replacement. Utilizing data from the STS Adult Cardiac Surgery Database, researchers have delivered the most extensive analysis to date on the outcomes of prosthetic valve types for patients aged 60 and younger.

The study, to be presented by Dr. Michael Bowdish, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, examines the impact of valve choice—mechanical versus bioprosthetic—on long-term survival. By linking patient-level data from the STS ACSD with the National Death Index, researchers offer fresh insights into the critical question of how age and valve type affect surgical outcomes.

With its rigorous methodology and focus on tailoring care to individual needs, the study underscores the potential of advanced surgical techniques and data analytics to improve patient outcomes. It also highlights the pivotal role of the STS National Database, which provides robust national benchmarks for cardiothoracic procedures in the US, in driving impactful research and clinical innovation.

In presenting the Adult Cardiac Clark Paper on day two of STS 2025, Increased Risk of Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement After Prior Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement with Concomitant Valve Disease, Dr. Robert Hawkins explores the heightened mortality risk for patients undergoing reoperation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) compared to those who have undergone surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR).

Using data from the STS Adult Cardiac Surgery Database, which covers the years 2011 to 2021, Dr. Hawkins and his team examine the impact of concomitant mitral and tricuspid valve diseases on reoperation outcomes, with a particular focus on TAVR explants.

As part of the “Aortic Valve Surgery: What Do Our Patients Need to Know?” session on Saturday, Jan. 25 from 4:30 – 5:45 p.m., Dr. Hawkins will discuss findings that show patients with prior TAVR are more likely to suffer from severe concomitant valve diseases, such as mitral regurgitation, compared to those who underwent SAVR. These patients demonstrated a higher mortality rate during reoperation, particularly TAVR explants with an increase in the odds of mortality. The study further finds that severe valve disease is associated with significantly higher mortality in both TAVR explant and redo-SAVR cases.

During this session, Dr. Hawkins will share findings indicating that heart teams should consider these risks when deciding between TAVR and SAVR, as well as when addressing dysfunctional TAVR valves to avoid the heightened risks of reoperation. 

On Saturday, Jan. 24, from 10:15 to 10:25 a.m., Tomaz Mesar, MD, from the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, will present An Age-Based Analysis of Transcatheter and Surgical Outcomes in Low-Risk Patients. The study compares outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low-risk patients with aortic stenosis, with a particular focus on the impact of age on treatment outcomes.

Using a combined STS and TVT database, Dr. Mesar analyzed low-risk patients who underwent either SAVR or TAVR for degenerative aortic stenosis over a 13-year period, categorizing them into three age groups: under 65, 65-74, and over 75.

As part of the “Updates in Structural Heart: Surgeons are Still in the Game” session, Dr. Mesar will present on the crucial role of age in determining the optimal approach—TAVR or SAVR—for structural heart interventions. His presentation will address how current findings suggest that TAVR may not be suitable for younger, low-risk patients due to observed higher mortality rates. 

For patients aged 65-74, the choice between TAVR and SAVR requires a personalized assessment, as neither procedure demonstrates a clear survival advantage. Finally, for patients over 75, while TAVR may offer a reduction in certain complications, SAVR appears to provide better long-term survival outcomes for this patient population.

At the 2025 Society of Thoracic Surgeons Annual Meeting, researchers will unveil a late-breaking study exploring the long-term survival outcomes of different surgical approaches for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The analysis leveraged the robust STS General Thoracic Surgery Database (GTSD), combined with long-term follow-up data, to evaluate the effectiveness of anatomic lung resections versus alternative techniques.

The study, to be presented by Dr. Christopher Seder, Rush University Medical Center, examined data from more than 32,000 patients, provides valuable real-world insights that complement existing randomized controlled trials, offering a comprehensive perspective on how surgical decisions influence outcomes over time. With findings drawn from diverse healthcare settings, this research underscores the potential of leveraging large-scale databases to refine treatment strategies and optimize patient care.

The STS GTSD remains a leading resource for capturing detailed surgical and patient data, driving advancements in cardiothoracic surgery. This latest study adds to its legacy by highlighting the importance of integrating real-world evidence into clinical practice.

The Congenital Heart Surgery Clark Paper, Understanding Mortality Following Congenital Heart Surgery: What Do Procedure-Specific Factors (PSF) Add? will assess the contribution of PSFs beyond standard risk factors in estimating mortality in this population.

Meena Nathan, MD, a pediatric cardiac surgeon at Children’s Hospital Boston, will present this paper on Friday, Jan. 24, from 2:16 to 2:24 p.m. as part of the "The Tribulations of Trials: Challenges in CHD Clinical Studies" session. During her talk, she will discuss data from The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Congenital Heart Surgery Database, a crucial resource for enhancing the quality of congenital heart surgery. In 2013, the Database expanded to include 82 Patient Safety Factors (PSFs) for benchmark operations (BMOs), though the impact of these PSFs on mortality prediction has yet to be fully explored.

To address this knowledge gap, Dr. Nathan and her team analyzed the contribution of PSFs to mortality estimation beyond standard STS risk factors. The study included a large cohort of BMOs from 115 U.S. centers between 2017 and 2022.

Dr. Nathan will present study findings, which emphasize the complexity of mortality prediction in congenital heart surgery and highlight the need for continued research to identify the most relevant risk factors and PSFs for each procedure, with the goal of developing more accurate prediction models that enhance patient care and support informed decision-making.

In patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), a novel analysis evaluating surgeon preference for multi- versus single-arterial grafting may help explain the differing results between prior retrospective analyses and randomized controlled trials regarding long-term survival.

A novel study to be presented on Friday, Jan. 24, at The Society of Thoracic Surgeons’ 61st Annual Meeting by lead author Justin Schaffer, MD, a cardiothoracic surgeon at Baylor Scott & White Health, offers fresh insights into the long-debated question of whether multi-arterial grafting (MAG) improves long-term survival compared to single-arterial grafting (SAG) in patients undergoing CABG. The analysis evaluates over one million Medicare beneficiaries and incorporates an innovative approach using surgeon preference as a tool to address unmeasured variables.

While the findings highlight nuances in interpreting retrospective and randomized trial data, they also underscore the need for future randomized studies, such as the forthcoming results of the ROMA trial, to definitively guide clinical decision-making.

The researchers emphasized that understanding the survival benefit of MAG over SAG requires randomized data, and it remains an important and open clinical question. 
 

In today’s presentation of the Clark Memorial Paper for General Thoracic Surgery, Lobectomy versus Sublobar Resection Among Lung Cancer Patients Understudied in Recent Clinical Trials, Gavitt Woodard, MD, a thoracic surgeon at Yale Medicine, will discuss the findings of a comprehensive evaluation of lung cancer surgery outcomes.

This study examined survival outcomes across groups to determine whether the trial’s results are widely applicable to a broader population, including older patients, those with reduced pulmonary function, and non-smokers.

Researchers analyzed data from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons General Thoracic Surgery Database, linking it with Medicare survival data to evaluate patient outcomes. The study included a diverse group of patients who underwent different surgical resections, including lobectomy, segmentectomy, and wedge resection.

“The study found that sublobar resection and lobectomy offer similar survival outcomes for many patients, including those over 75, with poor lung function, or who are lifelong nonsmokers,” said Dr. Woodard. "Inadequate lymph node evaluation during sublobar resection was associated with worse survival. These findings highlight the need for better nodal assessment, particularly for patients with compromised lungs or minimal lymph node spread."