Objectives
To describe a novel atrial retractor and compare 2 methods of intraoperative left atrial retraction (LA) for minimally invasive (MI) mitral valve (MV) repair.
Methods
Left atrial retraction was performed on 5 swine cadavers to evaluate performance (percent of MV annulus (MVA) accessible), encountered complications, ease of use, and surgical time for the MI atrial retractor (MIAR) and a HeartPort atrial retractor.
Results
Estimated accessibilities were 93.0 % (SE=3.2) and 92.7 % (SE=3.3), for the HeartPort and MIAR retractors, respectively, with a non-significant difference of 0.3%, (se=2.2%, p=.8832, df=34). Tissue damage occurred in 1 case for the MIAR retractor and 2 cases for the HeartPort retractor. The mean surgical times for retractor placement and MVA exposure were 107.4, and 39.2 seconds, for the HeartPort and MIAR retractors, respectively, with a highly significant difference of 68.2 seconds (p=.0092, df=4).
Conclusions
The MIAR retractor is a suitable alternative method of atrial retraction compared to standard techniques of retraction. While it provides comparable exposure of the MVA, it is less time consuming to place, provides subjectively more working volume within the LA, and has the advantage of minimal atriotomy incision length and customizable retraction.