SynthesisJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2024
Safety and efficacy of Cox-Maze procedure for atrial fibrillation during mitral valve surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk of Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence After Modified Cox-Maze IV Surgery: Comparing Atrial Functional Mitral Regurgitation and Rheumatic Mitral Regurgitation.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- A Prediction Model of Stable Warfarin Doses in Patients After Mechanical Heart Valve Replacement Based on a Machine Learning Algorithm.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Comment on: "Hematological Toxicity of PARP Inhibitors in Metastatic Prostate Cancer Patients with Mutations of BRCA or HRR Genes: A Systematic Review and Safety Meta‑analysis".Targeted oncology · 2024Article
- When Rhythm Correction Turns Risky: Rare Right-Sided Haemorrhagic Pleural Effusion Post Maze Procedure.European journal of case reports in internal medicine · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCox-Maze procedure is currently the gold standard treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF). However, data on the effectiveness of the Cox-Maze procedure after concomitant mitral valve surgery (MVS) are not well established. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of Cox-Maze procedure versus no-maze procedure n in AF patients undergoing mitral valve surgery through a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.
methodsA systematic search on PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials (Cochrane Library, Issue 02, 2017) databases were performed using three databases from their inception to March 2023, identifying all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing Cox-Maze procedure versus no procedure in AF patients undergoing mitral valve surgery. Data were extracted and analyzed according to predefined clinical endpoints.
resultsNine RCTs meeting the inclusion criteria were included in this systematic review with 663 patients in total (341 concomitant Cox-Maze with MVS and 322 MVS alone). Across all studies with included AF patients undergoing MV surgery, the concomitant Cox-Maze procedure was associated with significantly higher sinus rhythm rate at discharge, 6 months, and 12 months follow-up when compared with the no-Maze group. Results indicated that there was no significant difference between the Cox-Maze and no-Maze groups in terms of 1 year all-cause mortality, pacemaker implantation, stroke, and thromboembolism.
conclusionsOur systematic review suggested that RCTs have demonstrated the addition of the Cox-Maze procedure for AF leads to a significantly higher rate of sinus rhythm in mitral valve surgical patients, with no increase in the rates of mortality, pacemaker implantation, stroke, and thromboembolism.
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.