Why the study?
Does the original maze III procedure improve early outcomes compared to modifications in patients requiring the maze procedure combined with mitral and additional valvular procedures?
Does the original maze III procedure improve early outcomes compared to modifications in patients requiring the maze procedure combined with mitral and additional valvular procedures?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This review discusses the evolution of the maze III procedure and compares early outcomes of the original procedure versus its modifications in patients with associated valvular pathology.
The maze III procedure has been the culmination of multiple surgical approaches for supraventricular arrhythmias. Its success in curing atrial fibrillation has generated multiple modifications which constitute attempts to simplify the operation, particularly with associated mitral or multiple valvular pathology. Our preference in these patients, however, has been to employ the original maze III procedure without modification. This review tracks the development of the maze III procedure and its modifications and compares the early outcomes in patients requiring the maze procedure combined with mitral and additional valvular procedures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arcidi et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: