Minimally invasive vs. conventional mitral valve surgery: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The evidence underlying the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS) is inconclusive. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate whether MIMVS improves clinical outcomes compared with conventional sternotomy.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to January 2024 for all randomised controlled trials (RCTs), comparing MIMVS with conventional mitral valve surgery. RevMan 5.4 was used to analyse the data with risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) as the effect measures.

Results

Eight studies reporting data on 7 RCTs were included in our review. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality, the number of patients requiring blood product transfusion

SUBMITTER: Amin A 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11345173 | biostudies-literature | 2024

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature