PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
October 1, 2008European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery530 citations

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

View Full Paper
PMPaul ModiUniversity of LiverpoolAHAnsar HassanMaine Medical CenterWCW. Randolph ChitwoodEast Carolina University

Structured PICO

Does minimally invasive mitral valve surgery reduce morbidity and mortality compared to conventional median sternotomy in patients requiring mitral valve surgery?

P
Population
Patients undergoing mitral valve surgery (up to 1,641 patients pooled for mortality analysis)
I
Intervention
Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (including minithoracotomy and hemisternotomy)
C
Comparator
Conventional mitral surgery (median sternotomy)
O
Outcome
Perioperative mortalityhard clinical

Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery is a safe and durable alternative to conventional sternotomy, offering reduced bleeding complications and faster recovery despite longer operative times.

Limitations

  • Data for minimally invasive mitral valve surgery after previous cardiac surgery are limited

Abstract

The mitral valve has been traditionally approached through a median sternotomy. However, significant advances in surgical optics, instrumentation, tissue telemanipulation, and perfusion technology have allowed for mitral valve surgery to be performed using progressively smaller incisions including the minithoracotomy and hemisternotomy. Due to reports of excellent results, minimally invasive mitral valve surgery has become a standard of care at certain specialized centers worldwide. This meta-analysis quantifies the effects of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery on morbidity and mortality compared with conventional mitral surgery and demonstrates equivalent perioperative mortality (1641 patients, odds ratio (OR) 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.15-1.42, p=0.18), reduced need for reoperation for bleeding (1553 patients, OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.35-0.90, p=0.02) and a trend towards shorter hospital stays (350 patients, weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.73, 95% CI -1.52 to 0.05, p=0.07). These benefits were evident despite longer cardiopulmonary bypass (WMD 25.81, 95% CI 13.13-38.50, p<0.0001) and cross-clamp times (WMD 20.91, 95% CI 8.79-33.04, p=0.0007) in the minimally invasive group. Case-control studies show consistently less pain and faster recovery compared to those having a conventional approach. Data for minimally invasive mitral valve surgery after previous cardiac surgery are limited but consistently demonstrate reduced blood loss, fewer transfusions and faster recovery compared to reoperative sternotomy. Long-term follow-up data from multiple cohort studies are also examined revealing equivalent survival and freedom from reoperation. Thus, current clinical data suggest that minimally invasive mitral valve surgery is a safe and a durable alternative to a conventional approach and is associated with less morbidity.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Modi et al. (2008) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d56b4875589c71d767c9fdhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcts.2008.07.057
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper