Evaluation of Anesthetic Management and Clinical Outcomes in Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery: A Retrospective Single-Center Study
Objective: Minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) has gained increasing popularity due to reduced surgical trauma and enhanced recovery protocols. However, data focusing on anesthetic management and postoperative clinical outcomes, particularly from Turkiye, are limited. This study aimed to retrospectively evaluate anesthetic approaches and postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing minimally invasive cardiac surgery at a single tertiary center.
Methods: This retrospective, exploratory observational study included adult patients who underwent minimally invasive cardiac surgery between January 1, 2020, and September 30, 2025 at our hospital. Demographic characteristics, perioperative anesthetic management, intraoperative variables, postoperative outcomes and complications were analyzed. Fascial plane block–based analgesia was compared with intravenous analgesia regarding extubation time, analgesic requirements, and length of hospital stay. Risk factors for postoperative complications were evaluated using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses.
Results: A total of 33 patients were included in the analysis, with a mean age of 56.2±11.9 years; 75.8% were male. The most common procedures were minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (42.4%) and aortic valve replacement (27.3%). Fascial plane blocks were applied in 66.7% of patients and were associated with reduced need for rescue analgesia (36.4% vs. 100%, P<0.001), earlier extubation (P=0.014), and shorter hospital stay (P=0.038), although considerable inter-patient variability was observed. Postoperative complications occurred in 42.4% of patients, with delirium (18.2%) and pneumonia (12.1%) being the most frequent. Diabetes mellitus, smoking, and prolonged cardiopulmonary bypass duration were associated with increased postoperative complication risk. In multivariate analysis, smoking remained an independent predictor of postoperative complications.
Conclusion: In this exploratory single-center study, minimally invasive cardiac surgery was performed safely in appropriately selected patients. Fascial plane block–based analgesia was associated with improved postoperative recovery. These preliminary findings warrant validation in larger, prospective studies. Preoperative optimization may further enhance outcomes.
1. Dieberg G, Smart NA, King N. Minimally invasive cardiac surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. 2016;223:554-560. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.08.227.
2. White A, Patvardhan C, Falter F. Anesthesia for minimally invasive cardiac surgery. J Thorac Dis. 2021;13(3):1886-1898. doi: 10.21037/jtd-20-1804.
3. Sepolvere, Giuseppe, and Simona Silvetti, eds. Fast-Track in Cardiac Anesthesia: Cardiac Surgery in the Era of ERAS. Springer Nature, 2024.
4. Santana O, Reyna J, Grana R, Buendia M, Lamas GA, Lamelas J. Outcomes of minimally invasive valve surgery versus standard sternotomy in obese patients undergoing isolated valve surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011;91(2):406-410. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2010.09.039.
5. Van Praet KM, Kempfert J, Jacobs S, et al. Mitral valve surgery: current status and future prospects of the minimally invasive approach. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2021;18(3):245-260. doi: 10.1080/17434440.2021.1894925.
6. Liu H, Emelife PI, Prabhakar A, et al. Regional anesthesia considerations for cardiac surgery. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2019;33(4):387-406. doi: 10.1016/j.bpa.2019.07.008.
7. Doenst T, Diab M, Sponholz C, Bauer M, Färber G. The Opportunities and Limitations of Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2017;114(46):777-784. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2017.0777.
8. Dost B, Turunc E, Aydin ME, et al. Pain Management in Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery: A Review of Current Clinical Evidence. Pain Ther. 2025;14(3):913-930. doi: 10.1007/s40122-025-00739-1.
9. Walther T, Falk V, Metz S, et al. Pain and quality of life after minimally invasive versus conventional cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 1999 Jun;67(6):1643-7. doi: 10.1016/s0003-4975(99)00284-2. PMID: 10391268.
10. Tang S, Qu Y, Jiang H, et al. Minimally invasive technique facilitates early extubation after cardiac surgery: a single-center retrospective study. BMC Anesthesiol. 2024;24(1):318. doi: 10.1186/s12871-024-02710-7.
11. Wang CC, DeBose-Scarlett A, Irlmeier R, et al. Safe Landing: Feasibility and Safety of Operating Room Extubation in Minimally Invasive Cardiac Valve Surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2024;38(12):2965-2972. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2024.09.014.
12. Helwani MA, Copeland C, Ridley CH, Kaiser HA, De Wet CJ. A 3-hour fast-track extubation protocol for early extubation after cardiac surgery. JTCVS Open. 2022;12:299-305. doi: 10.1016/j.xjon.2022.07.006.
13. Yu S, Valencia MB, Roques V, Aljure OD. Regional analgesia for minimally invasive cardiac surgery. J Card Surg. 2019;34(11):1289-1296. doi: 10.1111/jocs.14177.
14. Chakravarthy M. Regional analgesia in cardiothoracic surgery: A changing paradigm toward opioid-free anesthesia? Ann Card Anaesth. 2018;21(3):225-227. doi: 10.4103/aca.ACA_56_18.
15. White A, Patvardhan C, Falter F. Anesthesia for minimally invasive cardiac surgery. J Thorac Dis. 2021;13(3):1886-1898. doi: 10.21037/jtd-20-1804.
16. Cosarcan SK, Sezer ÖA, Gürkahraman S, Erçelen Ö. Regional analgesia techniques for effective recovery from coronary artery bypass surgeries: a retrospective study involving the experience of a single center. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2022;17(1):170. doi: 10.1186/s13019-022-01923-6.
17. Petersen J, Kloth B, Konertz J, et al. Economic impact of enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in minimally invasive cardiac surgery. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21(1):254. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06218-5.
18. Malvindi PG, Bifulco O, Berretta P, et al. On-table extubation is associated with reduced intensive care unit stay and hospitalization after trans-axillary minimally invasive mitral valve surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2024;65(3):ezae010. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezae010.
19. Salenger R, Lobdell K, Grant MC. Update on minimally invasive cardiac surgery and enhanced recovery after surgery. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2024;37(1):10-15. doi: 10.1097/ACO.0000000000001322.
20. Navas-Blanco JR, Kantola A, Whitton M, et al. Enhanced recovery after cardiac surgery: A literature review. Saudi J Anaesth. 2024;18(2):257-264. doi: 10.4103/sja.sja_62_24.
21. Piekarski F, Rohner M, Monsefi N, Bakhtiary F, Velten M. Anesthesia for Minimal Invasive Cardiac Surgery: The Bonn Heart Center Protocol. J Clin Med. 2024;13(13):3939. doi: 10.3390/jcm13133939.
22. Hong B, Oh C, Jo Y, Lee S, Park S, Kim YH. Current evidence of ultrasound-guided fascial plane blocks for cardiac surgery: a narrative literature review. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2022;75(6):460-472. doi: 10.4097/kja.22564.
23. Capuano P, Sepolvere G, Toscano A, et al. Fascial plane blocks for cardiothoracic surgery: a narrative review. J Anesth Analg Crit Care. 2024;4(1):20. doi: 10.1186/s44158-024-00155-5.
24. Sepolvere G, Marianello D, Santonocito C, et al. Perspectives on the Role of Thoracic Fascial Blocks in Cardiac Anaesthesia: Will They Represent a New Era? J Clin Med. 2025;14(3):973. doi: 10.3390/jcm14030973.
Copyright (c) 2026 The European Research Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Downloads
Article Information
- Article Type Research Article
- Submitted March 9, 2026
- Accepted May 13, 2026
- Published June 8, 2026
- Issue 2026: Online First
- Section Research Article
- Categories
