Sciact
  • EN
  • RU

Minimally Invasive or Conventional Sternotomy for Mitral Valve Surgery With Concomitant Surgical Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: A Comparative Systematic Review Full article

Journal Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine
ISSN: 1530-6550 , E-ISSN: 2153-8174
Output data Year: 2025, Volume: 26, Number: 8, Article number : 39706, Pages count : 11 DOI: 10.31083/rcm39706
Tags atrial fibrillation; Cox-Maze procedure; mitral valve; minimally invasive surgery
Authors Kashapov Robert 1 , Afanasyev Alexander 1 , Sharifulin Ravil 1 , Khrushchev Sergey 2 , Ruzankin Pavel 2 , Demin Igor 1 , Bogachev-Prokophiev Alexander 1
Affiliations
1 E. Meshalkin National Medical Research Center, Institute of Cardiovascular Pathology Research, 630055 Novosibirsk, Russian Federation
2 Sobolev Institute of Mathematics, 630090 Novosibirsk, Russian Federation

Funding (1)

1 Sobolev Institute of Mathematics FWNF-2024-0001

Abstract: Background: Presently, the availability of single-stage surgical correction of mitral valve disease combined with atrial fibrillation (AF) via a mini-access approach remains limited. Moreover, the comparative effectiveness of this procedure versus conventional sternotomy (CS) remains poorly understood. Thus, this study aimed to conduct a comparative assessment of the efficacy and safety of concomitant mitral valve surgery and AF ablation via a minimally invasive approach (minimally invasive cardiac surgery, MICS group) versus the standard sternotomy approach (CS group). Methods: An extensive literature search was performed to identify relevant studies. Additionally, for comparative analysis, we included isolated studies where the combined intervention was conducted exclusively via either minimally invasive or CS as the primary access. Results: Freedom from atrial arrhythmia (AA) for MICS and CS was 94.52% [95% CI 91.52, 96.50] vs. 80.76% [95% CI 67.19, 89.59] and 86.22% [95% CI 80.13, 90.66] vs. 86.33% [95% CI 79.39, 91.19] at 1 and 2 years, respectively, with no statistically significant differences. Meanwhile, cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and aortic cross-clamp (ACC) times were significantly longer in the MICS group compared to CS (CPB: 151.50 vs. 120.01 min; ACC: 112.36 vs. 101.43 min; p < 0.001). There were no differences in mortality between groups (p = 0.709). The rate of pacemaker implantation was significantly higher in the CS group (MICS: 3.32% [95% CI 1.58, 6.87] vs. CS: 5.20% [95% CI 2.80, 9.46]; p < 0.001). Conclusion: This meta-analysis found that the minimally invasive approach was associated with longer CPB and ACC times but a lower rate of pacemaker implantation, with no significant differences observed in mortality and freedom from AA at 1 and 2 years. The PROSPERO registration: CRD42024570022, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024570022
Cite: Kashapov R. , Afanasyev A. , Sharifulin R. , Khrushchev S. , Ruzankin P. , Demin I. , Bogachev-Prokophiev A.
Minimally Invasive or Conventional Sternotomy for Mitral Valve Surgery With Concomitant Surgical Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: A Comparative Systematic Review
Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine. 2025. V.26. N8. 39706 :1-11. DOI: 10.31083/rcm39706 WOS Scopus OpenAlex
Dates:
Submitted: Apr 13, 2025
Accepted: Jun 18, 2025
Published print: Aug 21, 2025
Published online: Aug 21, 2025
Identifiers:
Web of science: WOS:001567946400002
Scopus: 2-s2.0-105017023963
OpenAlex: W4414068638
Citing: Пока нет цитирований
Altmetrics: