ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2021
Long-term results after mitral valve surgery using minimally invasive versus sternotomy approach: a propensity matched comparison of a large single-center series.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Minithoracotomy versus sternotomy in mitral valve surgery: meta-analysis from recent matched and randomized studies.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Axillary Versus Sternotomy Access in Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Innovations (Philadelphia, Pa.)Pooled it
- Conventional Versus Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Replacement: A Retrospective Comparison of Sternotomy, Mini-Thoracotomy, and Periareolar Approaches.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Early outcomes and resource utilization across contemporary transcatheter and surgical valve interventions: a single-center observational study.BMC research notes · 2026Observational
- Robotic mitral repair in echocardiographically symmetrical and asymmetrical Barlow's disease.Annals of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- An international survey-based assessment of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2023Article
- An Individualized, Less-Invasive Surgical Approach Algorithm Improves Outcome in Elderly Patients Undergoing Mitral Valve Surgery.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2023Article
- Safety and Efficacy of the Transaxillary Access for Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery-A Propensity Matched Competitive Analysis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMitral valve (MV) surgery has traditionally been performed by conventional sternotomy (CS), but more recently minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has become another treatment option. The aim of this study is to compare short- and long-term results of MV surgery after CS and MIS.
methodsThis study was a retrospective propensity-matched analysis of MV operations between January 2005 and December 2015.
resultsAmong 1357 patients, 496 underwent CS and 861 MIS. Matching resulted in 422 patients per group. The procedure time was longer with MIS than CS (192 vs. 185 min; p = 0.002) as was cardiopulmonary bypass time (133 vs. 101 min; p < 0.001) and X-clamp time (80 vs. 71 min; p < 0.001). 'Short-term' successful valve repair was higher with MIS (96.0% vs. 76.0%, p < 0.001). Length of hospital stay was shorter in MIS than CS patients (10 vs. 11 days; p = 0.001). There was no difference in the overall 30-day mortality rate. Cardiovascular death was lower after MIS (1.2%) compared with CS (3.8%; OR 0.30; 95%CI 0.11-0.84). The difference did not remain significant after adjustment for procedural differences (aOR 0.40; 95%CI 0.13-1.25). Pacemaker was required less often after MIS (3.3%) than CS (11.2%; aOR 0.31; 95%CI 0.16-0.61), and acute renal failure was less common (2.1% vs. 11.9%; aOR 0.22; 95%CI 0.10-0.48). There were no significant differences with respect to rates of stroke, myocardial infarction or repeat MV surgery. The 7-year survival rate was significantly better after MIS (88.5%) than CS (74.8%; aHR 0.44, 95%CI 0.31-0.64).
conclusionThis study demonstrates that good results for MV surgery can be obtained with MIS, achieving a high MV repair rate, low peri-procedural morbidity and mortality, and improved long-term survival.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.