ReviewJournal of visualized surgery2026
Transitioning from direct vision to totally endoscopic minimally invasive cardiac surgery.
Review in Journal of visualized surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS) has evolved significantly over the past two decades, shifting from conventional median sternotomy toward sternal-sparing approaches that offer reduced surgical trauma, lower complication rates, and faster patient recovery. As incision size has progressively decreased, the field has advanced toward totally endoscopic cardiac surgery (TECS), in which the entire intracardiac procedure is performed exclusively under thoracoscopic visualization. Despite growing adoption, the transition from direct-vision MICS to TECS remains technically demanding and operationally complex. Drawing on our institutional experience at Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, and a review of the current literature, we provide a comprehensive overview of the key elements required to successfully build and sustain a TECS program. These include a working definition of totally endoscopic surgery, a proposed four-phase surgeon training pathway, simulation-based learning strategies, robotic credentialing, team-based training, technical instrumentation, scope management, patient selection criteria, procedural challenges, and postoperative outcomes. Both non-robotic and robotic-assisted endoscopic platforms are discussed. Large-scale evidence confirms that MICS and TECS achieve outcomes equivalent or superior to sternotomy, with low mortality and stroke rates, and significantly improved health-related quality of life. Notably, non-robotic TECS offers a scalable and cost-effective pathway that does not require an expert bedside assistant, can address multiple pathologies simultaneously, and is feasible across diverse healthcare settings. Emerging technologies-including articulated robotic instruments, artificial intelligence-enhanced imaging, and next-generation robotic platforms-are expected to further expand the reach and safety of fully endoscopic cardiac procedures.
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.