Posted by Carl Plaskett on August 27, 2001 at 21:55:52:
In Reply to: minimally invasive Maze posted by Erika on August 27, 2001 at 21:24:56:
I believe you will find that the overall success rate for the minimally invasive maze, as it is currently being performed, is probably similar to that of the open chest procedure. The decision seems to depend upon what the surgeon prefers and the size of the patient. Because of the size of the instruments used in the mini-maze, I believe larger patients are better served by the open chest routine, because the instruments are not long enough to reach to where they need to go when the heart is being accessed from beneath the ribs of a large patient. I like the idea of the surgeon actually being able to see what he is doing without the use of a "scope" from beneath or between the ribs, but that is ONLY MY feeling.
When I had mine done, just 7 months ago, I felt that the info available at that time was showing longer times post maze for the mini-maze patients to reach NSR than those who had the open chest routine, but I think they are rapidly approaching being equal. I asked my surgeon to do whichever he wished, but gave him my reasons for prefering the open chest routine. I awoke to find that I had experienced the open chest procedure. I am also a large framed person, so perhaps that was why I received that procedure. The only difference between the two procedures is that one involves opening the chest at the sternum and the other does not. The open chest routine results in a recovery which restricts the patient from lifting and driving longer than the mini-maze.