Aortic Valve Replacement: Totally Endoscopic versus Mini-Sternotomy.

(1) Background: The development of totally endoscopic aortic valve replacement has the potential to enhance clinical results compared to mini-sternotomy. To our knowledge, no comparison between these two techniques has been conducted before. Therefore, the objective of this retrospective study is to examine the results after both totally endoscopic and mini-sternotomy approaches. (2) Methods: This study covered all elective patients who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement, either totally endoscopically (n = 392) or through a mini-sternotomy (n = 323), between 2013 and 2021. Multivariable analysis was used to account for baseline variations between the two groups. All data were retrospectively gathered and analysed. The primary objective of this study was the one-year mortality rate. (3) Results: The mean aortic cross-clamping and cardiopulmonary bypass times were significantly longer in the totally endoscopic approach (cross-clamping: 43.73 ± 13.71 min and 61.93 ± 16.76 min, p -value < 0.001; CPB time: 64.86 ± 23.02 min and 93.23 ± 23.67 min, p -value < 0.001). However, perioperative bleeding was lower (706.40 ± 542.77 mL and 444.50 ± 515.84 mL, p -value < 0.001). The primary objective, one-year survival, did not significantly differ between both groups (Mini-AVR: 94.5% vs TEAVR: 93.3%, p -value = 0.520). (4) Conclusions: Our results show that totally endoscopic aortic valve replacement has comparable clinical results compared to aortic valve replacement through mini-sternotomy.