ReviewJournal of chest surgery2023
Minimally Invasive Procedure versus Conventional Redo Sternotomy for Mitral Valve Surgery in Patients with Previous Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Journal of chest surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Cardiopulmonary bypass versus non-bypass surgery for tumor thrombus extending into the inferior vena cava or right atrium in non-cardiac malignancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Minimally invasive and robotic-assisted excision of intracardiac masses: a single-center retrospective study.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Minimally invasive pulmonary valve replacement via left anterior mini-thoracotomy after Tetralogy of Fallot repair: a five-patient case series.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Midterm Echocardiographic Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery in Patients With Previous Cardiac Surgery.Annals of thoracic surgery short reports · 2026Article
- Mitral reoperations, reimagined.JTCVS structural and endovascular · 2026Article
- When Mitral Repair Fails: Understanding Recurrence, Risk Factors, and Treatment Choices.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Article
- Ultra-fast-track anesthesia in cardiac surgery: perioperative outcomes, patient selection, and implementation strategies-a narrative review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Endoscopic techniques in redo mitral and tricuspid valve surgery.Journal of visualized surgery · 2026Article
- Postoperative lactate trajectories predict in-hospital adverse outcomes and differ by surgical approach in cardiac surgery: a propensity score-matched study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery in Patients Aged ≥75 Years: An Expanding Standard of Care.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Endoscopic Closure of Iatrogenic Ventricular Septal Defect After 2 Previous Aortic Valve Replacements.JACC. Case reports · 2025Article
- Proximal Landing Zone's Impact on Outcomes of Branched and Fenestrated Aortic Arch Repair.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Short- and mid-term outcomes after redo surgical valve replacement.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Cardiac surgery dilemmas: evaluating outcomes of sternotomy versus thoracotomy.Turkish journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
- Redo Minimally Invasive Right Atrial Mass Removal After Surgical Atrial Septal Defect Closure.Journal of the Saudi Heart Association · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The heightened morbidity and mortality associated with repeat cardiac surgery are well documented. Redo median sternotomy (MS) and minimally invasive valve surgery are options for patients with prior cardiac surgery who require mitral valve surgery (MVS). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the outcomes of redo MS and minimally invasive MVS (MIMVS) in this population. Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus for studies comparing outcomes of redo MS and MIMVS for MVS. To calculate risk ratios (RRs) for binary outcomes and weighted mean differences (MDs) for continuous data, we employed a random-effects model. Results: We included 12 retrospective observational studies, comprising 4157 participants (675 for MIMVS; 3482 for redo MS). Reductions in mortality (RR, 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-0.80), length of hospital stay (MD, -4.23; 95% CI, -5.77 to -2.68), length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (MD, -2.02; 95% CI, -3.17 to -0.88), and new-onset acute kidney injury (AKI) risk (odds ratio, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.61) were statistically significant and favored MIMVS (p<0.05). No significant differences were observed in aortic cross-clamp time, cardiopulmonary bypass time, or risk of perioperative stroke, new-onset atrial fibrillation, surgical site infection, or reoperation for bleeding (p>0.05). Conclusion: The current literature, which primarily consists of retrospective comparisons, underscores certain benefits of MIMVS over redo MS. These include decreased mortality, shorter hospital and ICU stays, and reduced AKI risk. Given the lack of high-quality evidence, prospective randomized control trials with adequate power are necessary to investigate long-term outcomes.
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.