ArticleAnnals of cardiothoracic surgery2026
Outcomes of robotic repair for the degenerative mitral valve: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Annals of cardiothoracic surgery, 2026. 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.
- Prior minimally invasive experience and the robotic mitral valve learning curve: a focused narrative review and the tactile-visual decoupling hypothesis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Robotic mitral valve repair (RMVr) provides a minimally invasive option for degenerative mitral regurgitation (MR), yet durability signals and patient outcomes remain heterogeneously reported. This current systematic review and meta-analysis aims to summarize survival and freedom from reoperation following RMVr in degenerative disease. Methods: Five databases were searched from inception through July 2025 for studies reporting RMVr outcomes in degenerative disease. Cohorts with mixed etiologies without separable data were excluded. Short-term mortality (<30 days) was the primary outcome, while mid- to long-term survival and freedom from reoperation were presented using Kaplan-Meier curves. Secondary endpoints included relevant morbidity outcomes and reoperation rates. Meta-regression analysis examined associations between cohort size and adverse outcomes and assessed temporal trends in RMVr technique. Results: Following independent screening, 15 studies were selected, including 11,432 patients. Pooled mean follow-up was 60.9 months (clinical) and 20.0 months (echocardiographic). Kaplan-Meier overall survival at 1, 3, 5 and 10 years was 98.9%, 98.7%, 97.4% and 92.3%, respectively. At 1, 3 and 5 years, freedom from reoperation was 97.7%, 96.0% and 96.0%, while freedom from recurrent ≥2+ MR was 98.3%, 95.8% and 95.8%. Pooled short-term (<30 days) mortality was 1.3% [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.1-1.4%]. Postoperative morbidity was low, with cerebrovascular accident (CVA) in 1.4% and acute kidney injury (AKI) in 1.3%. Reoperation for bleeding and valve dysfunction occurred in 2.3% and 2.2% of patients, respectively. Pooled mean intensive care unit (ICU) stay was 1.2 days and hospital length of stay (LOS) was 6.0 days. Meta-regression suggested increasing adoption of neochordae techniques over time (P=0.015). Heterogeneity was high for several parameters, reflecting differences in study design, surgeon experience, and follow-up duration. Conclusions: In degenerative mitral disease, RMVr demonstrates low short-term mortality and complications, with favorable mid- to long-term durability, including high freedom from recurrent moderate-to-severe MR and reoperation. These findings support RMVr as an effective and durable surgical approach to degenerative mitral pathology, underscoring the need for prospective, standardized studies with robust echocardiographic follow-up and case-mix adjustment.
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.