ReviewJournal of the Saudi Heart Association2025
Efficacy and Safety of Concomitant Surgical Ablation During Mitral Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review.
Review in Journal of the Saudi Heart Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Management of Arrhythmic Mitral Valve Prolapse: Potential Impact and Current Evidence.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common comorbidity in patients undergoing mitral valve surgery (MVS), significantly increasing the risk of thromboembolism, heart failure, and mortality. Surgical ablation has recently been given a Class IA recommendation for concomitant MVS, reinforcing its role in restoring sinus rhythm and improving outcomes in this population. However, concerns about procedural complexity, extended operative time, and postoperative risks have limited its widespread adoption. This systematic review aims to synthesize evidence from recent randomized controlled trials to evaluate the safety and efficacy of surgical ablation for AF in patients undergoing MVS, addressing critical gaps in current clinical practice. Methodology: We systematically searched Scopus, PubMed, and Ovid up to December of 2024 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated surgical ablation concomitant to mitral valve repair or replacement (MVR) as the intervention, compared to isolated MVR. Results: This review included 15 RCTs with 1219 patients (681 in the MVR + ablation group and 538 in the MVR-only group). Sinus rhythm restoration was significantly higher in the MVR + ablation group at discharge (64.7% vs. 18.8%), 6 months (62.5% vs. 22.4%), and 1 year (66.0% vs. 25.7%), indicating both immediate and sustained benefits. Short-term mortality rates were similar between groups (2.2% vs. 1.97%), while 1-year mortality was lower in the MVR + ablation group (5.43% vs. 5.91%). Pacemaker implantation rates were slightly higher in the MVR + ablation group, while stroke and thromboembolic events were rare and comparable between groups. Conclusion: Surgical ablation combined with mitral valve surgery significantly improves sinus rhythm outcomes. While stroke and short-term mortality remain comparable between groups, one-year mortality was lower in the ablation group, warranting further investigation. Additionally, the increased pacemaker implantation rate in specific populations warrants tailored approaches.
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.