Key result
Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery was associated with less bleeding and shorter hospital stays compared to median sternotomy, with no significant difference in 6-week mortality (3.7% vs 4.3%).
Why the study?
The study was conducted to compare minimally invasive mitral valve surgery with conventional mitral valve surgery via median sternotomy.
Does minimally invasive mitral valve surgery improve clinical outcomes compared to median sternotomy in patients requiring mitral valve surgery?
Cohort (n=73)
No
Does minimally invasive mitral valve surgery improve clinical outcomes compared to median sternotomy in patients requiring mitral valve surgery?
Absolute Event Rate: 3.7% vs 4.3%
Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery offers reduced bleeding and shorter hospital stays without increasing major complications or short-term mortality, despite longer procedural times.
May inform patient selection for minimally invasive mitral surgery; leaves open need for randomized trials before practice change.
Objective: The aim of the current study was to compare minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) with conventional mitral valve surgery via median sternotomy. Patients and methods: A total of 73 patients were recruited for a mitral valve surgery either minimally invasive (27 patients) or conventional open heart (46 patients) mitral valve surgery. Results: Patients in the MIMVS group reported less bleeding with fewer rates of transfusion and shorter hospital stay. Moreover, no differences were reported regarding major complications including stroke and myocardial infarction. Also, there was no difference in total hospital costs. Meanwhile, the MIMVS group presented a significant rise in the time of cardiopulmonary bypass, cross clamp and procedure. Six weeks follow up showed no significant differences in mortality. The causes of death in the MIMVS patient and the 2 patients in sternotomy group were non-cardiac, but due to infection by covid-19 which ended by respiratory failure. Conclusion: MIMVS could be more beneficial for mitral valve patients with consideration of inclusion criteria.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Farouk et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Mitral valve surgery (n=73). Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) vs. Conventional mitral valve surgery via median sternotomy was evaluated on 6-week mortality. Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery was associated with less bleeding and shorter hospital stays compared to median sternotomy, with no significant difference in 6-week mortality (3.7% vs 4.3%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: