@article{ACS16962,
author = {Michael L. Williams and Bridget Hwang and Linna Huang and Ashley Wilson-Smith and John Brookes and Aditya Eranki and Tristan D. Yan and T. Sloane Guy and Johannes Bonatti},
title = {Robotic versus conventional sternotomy mitral valve surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis},
journal = {Annals of Cardiothoracic Surgery},
volume = {11},
number = {5},
year = {2022},
keywords = {},
abstract = {Background: Robotic-assisted mitral valve surgery (RMVS) is becoming an increasingly performed procedure in cardiac surgery, however, its true safety and efficacy compared to the gold standard conventional sternotomy approach [conventional sternotomy mitral valve surgery (CSMVS)] remains debated. The aim of this meta-analysis was to provide a comprehensive analysis of all available literature comparing RMVS to CSMVS.
Methods: An electronic search of five databases was performed to identify all relevant studies comparing RMVS to CSMVS. Pre-defined primary outcomes of interest included all-cause mortality, cerebrovascular accidents (CVA) and re-operation for bleeding. Secondary outcomes of interest included cross clamp time, cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time, intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS), post-operative atrial fibrillation (POAF) and red blood cell (RBC) transfusion.
Results: The search strategy identified fourteen studies qualifying for inclusion in this meta-analysis comparing RMVS to CSMVS. The outcomes of 6,341 patients (2,804 RMVS and 3,537 CSMVS) were included. RMVS had significantly lower mortality when compared to CSMVS group in both the unmatched [odds ratio (OR) 0.33; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.19–0.57; P},
issn = {2304-1021}, url = {https://www.annalscts.com/article/view/16962}
}