Abstract
Background: Perioperative management using minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS), compared to full sternotomy (FS) cardiac surgery, is considered to improve postoperative recovery, and reduce hospital length of stay (LOS). Methods: A comprehensive systematic search was conducted across MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library to identify RCT comparing MICS to FS approach for aortic valve, mitral valve, and coronary artery bypass surgery. Meta-analysis of extracted data was performed using random effects models. Results: A total of 33 RCTs including 2920 patients were identified. Overall MD (95% CI) for hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) LOS after MICS was significantly shorter compared to FS (-0.88 days (-1.55;-0.20), p<0.013; 2606 patients) and (-0.23 days (-0.41;-0.05), p=0.012; 2242 patients), respectively. Additionally, postoperative blood loss was reduced with the use of MICS, (-192.07 ml (-292.32;-91.82), p=0.002; 718 patients). There was no evidence for differences between both groups in terms of postoperative ventilation times, duration of surgery, reintervention rate, incidence of postoperative atrial fibrillation or stroke, hospital mortality, or 1-year mortality. Conclusion: Within the limitations of a meta-analysis, MICS was found to be effective in promoting faster recovery by reducing postoperative blood loss, ICU, and hospital LOS.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
