Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Background/Objectives: Minimally invasive (MIS) mitral valve surgery has been proven to be a safe and effective alternative to median sternotomy (ST), with advantages in postoperative recovery and morbidity. However, its role in the setting of infective endocarditis (IE) remains uncertain. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the outcomes of MIS in mitral valve surgery for infective endocarditis. Methods: A PRISMA-compliant search for studies including patients undergoing MIS for mitral valve IE was performed through 14 January 2026, in PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane. Time-to-event data were reconstructed from published Kaplan–Meier curves. A secondary comparative analysis focusing on MIS versus ST techniques was conducted. Results: Fourteen retrospective studies comprising 949 patients were analyzed. In the MIS cohort, early mortality was 4.2% (95%CI: 1.8%, 7.4%). Overall survival was 86.7% at 1 year, 75.2% at 5 years and 56.2% at 10 years. Freedom from IE-related reoperation remained high at 97.5%, 95.9%, and 90.7% at 1, 5, and 10 years, respectively. Mitral valve repair was performed in 52.5% of patients. In secondary comparative analyses, overall survival at 4-year follow-up was not different between MIS and ST HR: 0.82 (95%CI: 0.43, 1.57), p = 0.55. MIS was associated with a significantly shorter intensive care unit (ICU) stay MD: −1.52 days (95%CI: −2.08, −0.97), p < 0.01. Conclusions: MIS for mitral valve IE is associated with favorable early and long-term outcomes, comparable survival with sternotomy, and reduced ICU stay. These findings suggest that MIS may be considered as a feasible and potentially effective alternative for the management of mitral valve IE in carefully selected patients. Further prospective comparative studies are warranted.
Karagkounis et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: