Key result
Minimally invasive mitral surgery in the elderly is linked to ~73% lower acute renal failure risk versus sternotomy.
Why the study?
The safety of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery in elderly patients remains debated.
Does minimally invasive mitral valve surgery improve postoperative outcomes compared to conventional sternotomy in elderly patients (≥65 years old) presenting for mitral valve surgery?
Meta-Analysis
Does minimally invasive mitral valve surgery improve postoperative outcomes compared to conventional sternotomy in elderly patients (≥65 years old) presenting for mitral valve surgery?
Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery in elderly patients is safe and reduces postoperative complications and length of stay compared to conventional sternotomy, despite longer procedural times.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery may reduce renal failure and length of stay in elderly patients; extends meta-analytic evidence for its adoption.
OBJECTIVE: The safety of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) in elderly patients is still debated. Our objective was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing MIMVS with conventional sternotomy (CS) in elderly patients (≥65 years old). METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for trials and observational studies comparing MIMVS with CS in patients ≥65 years old presenting for mitral valve surgery. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis of all outcomes. RESULTS: The MIMVS group had lower odds of acute renal failure (odds ratio [OR] 0.27; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.78), prolonged intubation (>48 h; OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.70), less blood product transfusion (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.82 units; 95% CI -1.29 to -0.34 units), shorter ICU length of stay (LOS; WMD -2.57 days; 95% CI -3.24 to -1.90 days) and hospital LOS (WMD -4.06 days; 95% CI -5.19 to -2.94 days). There were no significant differences in the odds of mortality, stroke, respiratory infection, reoperation for bleeding, and postoperative atrial fibrillation. MIMVS was associated with longer cross-clamp (WMD 11.8 min; 95% CI 3.5 to 20.1 min) and cardiopulmonary bypass times (WMD 23.0 min; 95% CI 10.4 to 35.6 min). CONCLUSIONS: MIMVS in elderly patients is associated with lower postoperative complications, blood transfusion, shorter ICU, and hospital LOS, and longer cross-clamp and bypass times.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hage et al. (2021) conducted a meta-analysis in mitral valve surgery. Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) vs. Conventional sternotomy (CS) was evaluated on Acute renal failure (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.78). Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery in elderly patients was associated with lower odds of acute renal failure and shorter hospital stay than conventional sternotomy.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: