Minimally Invasive versus Open Mitral Valve Surgery a Consensus Statement of the International Society of Minimally Invasive Coronary Surgery (ISMICS) 2010
Why the study?
Does minimally invasive mitral valve surgery via thoracotomy improve clinical and resource outcomes compared with conventional open mitral valve surgery via median sternotomy in adults who require surgical intervention for mitral valve disease?
Population
Adults who require surgical intervention for mitral valve disease
Comparison
Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery via… vs Conventional open mitral valve surgery via…
Design
Guideline
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
Guides individualized mitral valve surgery selection by stroke risk; extends Level 1 evidence informing technique choice.
Structured PICO
Does minimally invasive mitral valve surgery via thoracotomy improve clinical and resource outcomes compared with conventional open mitral valve surgery via median sternotomy in adults who require surgical intervention for mitral valve disease?
P
Population
Adults who require surgical intervention for mitral valve disease
I
Intervention
Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery via thoracotomy
C
Comparator
Conventional open mitral valve surgery via median sternotomy
O
Outcome
Clinical and resource outcomes
Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery is a reasonable alternative to conventional sternotomy, offering faster recovery but carrying a higher risk of stroke and specific procedural complications.
Limitations
- Retrospective studies with important differences in baseline patient characteristics, which may produce bias
- Available evidence consists almost entirely of observational studies
- retrospective studies with important differences in baseline patient characteristics
- evidence consists almost entirely of observational studies
Cite This Study
Falk et al. (2011) conducted a review in Mitral valve disease. Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery via thoracotomy vs. Conventional open mitral valve surgery via median sternotomy was evaluated on Clinical and resource outcomes. Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery offers comparable mortality to conventional surgery but increases the risk of stroke (2.1% vs 1.2%), aortic dissection (0.2% vs 0%), and phrenic nerve palsy.