Background: Over the years, surgeons have used a midline sternotomy to repair atrial septal defects (ASD) with good long-term outcomes but unsatisfactory cosmosis.Because of this, less intrusive surgical procedures are employed to lessen surgical trauma and improve the final cosmetic outcome.Aim of the study: to assess ASDs repair using right-anterolateral minithoracotomy (RALT) versus median sternotomy in terms of surgical outcomes.Patients and Methods: Our study was prospective, comparative, nonrandomized ,non-blinded study that carried out at our institution between June 2016 and October 2018. It included forty surgical candidates who had isolated ostium secondum ASDs; patients were allocated to either group I (RALT group) (n=20),or group II (conventional sternotomy) (n=20). Results: before surgeries, demographic and echocardiographic data were comparable in both groups except for more female patients(80%) in group I(p-value=0.022) and more patients with low body surface area in group II(p-value=0.002).Group II had considerably shorter total bypass time than group I(p-value=0.004).After surgeries, data were identical in both groups regarding ICU and total hospital stay, chest tube drainage,and amount of blood transfusion.However,group I had significantly shorter mechanical ventilation time(p-value=0.002) and smaller length of wound (p <0.001).Wound infection rate was substantially higher in sternotomy group(p-value=0.035).Patient satisfaction was higher in minithoracotomy group(90%) than in sternotomy group(60%).No cases required conversion to sternotomy in group I. Neither residual defects nor mortality were encountered in both groups. Conclusion: Right anterolateral minithoracotomy approach is safe, effective,cosmetic, less traumatic, and saving resources.

Background: Aortic valve replacement (AVR) remains the only treatment that was revealed to advance the natural history in the cases with severe symptomatic aortic valve disorder. However, aortic valve diseases were challenging in young and adults in middle age persons. The aim of our study: was to compare the mid-term outcomes, quality of life and adverse valve- related events among patients undergoing the Ross procedure and those receiving a mechanical aortic valve . Patients and Methods: This study included patients with aortic valve disease divided into Fifty patients were candidates for ROSS procedure and the other Fifty were for mechanically aortic valve replacement after obtaining the approval of the local ethical committee. Results: Ross patients show statistically significant lower MLHFQ scores compared to Mechanical valve patients; however, a nonsignificant change was found among the study groups in terms of major cardiovascular events or mortality. Conclusion: Mechanical AVR is accompanied by low morbidities and mortalities in both the short and long term. Our data suggest that The Ross operation may be accomplished securely and reproducibly in properly particular cases with lower morbidity and mortality and better quality of life.