The use of the Scar Cosmesis Assessment and rating scale to evaluate the cosmetic outcomes of totally thoracoscopic cardiac surgery

Abstract Background Conventional median sternotomy is widely used in cardiac surgery, while thoracoscopic cardiac surgery, which is considered to have aesthetic advantages, is being performed increasingly more often in China because patients’ requests for minimally invasive procedures yielding aesthetically pleasing results have significantly increased. Few studies have been conducted to assess surgical scars after cardiac surgery. Compared to the median sternotomy approach, multiple-incision totally thoracoscopic cardiac surgery requires smaller but numerous and scattered incisions. In addition to two working ports on the upper and lower margins of the right breast, an inguinal incision and an axillary incision are made. Therefore, does totally thoracoscopic cardiac surgery truly have aesthetic advantages? This study has the following objectives: (a) to compare median sternotomy cardiac surgery and total thoracoscopic cardiac surgery in terms of the long-term cosmetic outcomes of post-operative scars and (b) to evaluate the effectiveness of the Scar Cosmesis Assessment and Rating scale in combination with the numeric rating scale in the assessment of surgical scars after cardiac surgery. Methods Consecutive patients who visited our institution from January 2019 to May 2019 for cardiac surgery via median sternotomy or the totally thoracoscopic approach and followed up for at least one year were included. Inter-rater reliability, internal consistency and convergent validity were evaluated for the Scar Cosmesis Assessment and Rating scale and the numeric rating scale. Clinical characteristics and the scores of the two scales were compared between the two groups using Student’s t test or the Mann-Whitney U test. Results Thirty-one patients underwent cardiac surgery via the totally thoracoscopic approach, and 42 patients underwent cardiac surgery via the median sternotomy approach. No significant differences were found in the demographic or clinical data between the two groups. The validity and reliability of the two scales were satisfactory. For the Scar Cosmesis Assessment and Rating scale, the median sternotomy group scored statistically significantly higher than did the totally thoracoscopic group on the “overall impression” and “patient question” subscales (P