This site is not optimized for Internet Explorer 8 (or older).
Please upgrade to a newer version of Internet Explorer or use an alternate browser such as Chrome or Firefox.
Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery versus conventional sternotomy mitral valve surgery: A systematic review and meta-analys
Meta-analysis of 119 studies (approx 38,000 patients) evaluating outcomes of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery with conventional sternotomy approach.
MMVS was associated with fewer days in hospital (RCT: MD: -2.2 days, 95% CI, [-3.7 to -0.8]; observational: MD: -2.4 days, 95% CI, [-2.7 to -2.1]). Observational studies suggested that MMVS reduced transfusion requirements with fewer units transfused per patient (MD: -1.2; 95% CI, [-1.6 to -0.9]) and fewer patients transfused (RR, 0.7; 95% CI, [0.6-0.7]). Observational data also suggested lower mortality with MMVS (RR, 0.6; 95% CI, [0.5-0.7], p < .001, I2 = 0%), but this was not corroborated by RCT data. The risk of postoperative mitral regurgitation (≥2+ or requiring re-intervention) did not differ between the two groups.