Minimally invasive mitral repair surgery: why does controversy still persist?

Jeevan Nagendran; Jorge Catrip; Katie L. Losenno; Corey Adams; Bob Kiaii; Michael W.A. Chu

doi:10.1080/14779072.2017.1266936

Minimally invasive mitral repair surgery: why does controversy still persist?

Jeevan Nagendran, Jorge Catrip, Katie L. Losenno, Corey Adams, Bob Kiaii, Michael W.A. Chu

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

9 Scopus citations

Abstract

Introduction: Surgical treatment for mitral valve disease has evolved and remains a rapidly expanding field. Minimally invasive mitral valve repair (MI-MVR) is a well-known alternative to conventional sternotomy mitral valve repair (cMVR). However, controversy as to the efficacy of MI-MVR persists, hindering the adoption and potential benefits of this less invasive approach. Areas covered: In this review, we provide an updated summary evaluation of the latest evidence, including observational studies, clinical trials and meta-analyses, regarding MI-MVR in comparison to cMVR. Expert commentary: The controversy that persists around the widespread adoption of MI-MVR procedures is addressed with the wealth of evidence published establishing similarly excellent outcomes between MI-MVR and cMVR.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	15-24
Number of pages	10
Journal	Expert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy
Volume	15
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1080/14779072.2017.1266936
State	Published - Jan 2 2017
Externally published	Yes

Keywords

endoscopic
mini-thoracotomy
Minimally invasive
mitral valve
robotic

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Internal Medicine
Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Access to Document

10.1080/14779072.2017.1266936

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Minimally invasive mitral repair surgery: why does controversy still persist?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this

@article{8efd4a3e8af748e19b648354fa9806cb,

title = "Minimally invasive mitral repair surgery: why does controversy still persist?",

abstract = "Introduction: Surgical treatment for mitral valve disease has evolved and remains a rapidly expanding field. Minimally invasive mitral valve repair (MI-MVR) is a well-known alternative to conventional sternotomy mitral valve repair (cMVR). However, controversy as to the efficacy of MI-MVR persists, hindering the adoption and potential benefits of this less invasive approach. Areas covered: In this review, we provide an updated summary evaluation of the latest evidence, including observational studies, clinical trials and meta-analyses, regarding MI-MVR in comparison to cMVR. Expert commentary: The controversy that persists around the widespread adoption of MI-MVR procedures is addressed with the wealth of evidence published establishing similarly excellent outcomes between MI-MVR and cMVR.",

keywords = "endoscopic, mini-thoracotomy, Minimally invasive, mitral valve, robotic",

author = "Jeevan Nagendran and Jorge Catrip and Losenno, {Katie L.} and Corey Adams and Bob Kiaii and Chu, {Michael W.A.}",

year = "2017",

month = jan,

day = "2",

doi = "10.1080/14779072.2017.1266936",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "15",

pages = "15--24",

journal = "Expert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy",

issn = "1477-9072",

publisher = "Expert Reviews Ltd.",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Minimally invasive mitral repair surgery

T2 - why does controversy still persist?

AU - Nagendran, Jeevan

AU - Catrip, Jorge

AU - Losenno, Katie L.

AU - Adams, Corey

AU - Kiaii, Bob

AU - Chu, Michael W.A.

PY - 2017/1/2

Y1 - 2017/1/2

N2 - Introduction: Surgical treatment for mitral valve disease has evolved and remains a rapidly expanding field. Minimally invasive mitral valve repair (MI-MVR) is a well-known alternative to conventional sternotomy mitral valve repair (cMVR). However, controversy as to the efficacy of MI-MVR persists, hindering the adoption and potential benefits of this less invasive approach. Areas covered: In this review, we provide an updated summary evaluation of the latest evidence, including observational studies, clinical trials and meta-analyses, regarding MI-MVR in comparison to cMVR. Expert commentary: The controversy that persists around the widespread adoption of MI-MVR procedures is addressed with the wealth of evidence published establishing similarly excellent outcomes between MI-MVR and cMVR.

AB - Introduction: Surgical treatment for mitral valve disease has evolved and remains a rapidly expanding field. Minimally invasive mitral valve repair (MI-MVR) is a well-known alternative to conventional sternotomy mitral valve repair (cMVR). However, controversy as to the efficacy of MI-MVR persists, hindering the adoption and potential benefits of this less invasive approach. Areas covered: In this review, we provide an updated summary evaluation of the latest evidence, including observational studies, clinical trials and meta-analyses, regarding MI-MVR in comparison to cMVR. Expert commentary: The controversy that persists around the widespread adoption of MI-MVR procedures is addressed with the wealth of evidence published establishing similarly excellent outcomes between MI-MVR and cMVR.

KW - endoscopic

KW - mini-thoracotomy

KW - Minimally invasive

KW - mitral valve

KW - robotic

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85006324688&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85006324688&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/14779072.2017.1266936

DO - 10.1080/14779072.2017.1266936

M3 - Review article

C2 - 27905211

AN - SCOPUS:85006324688

VL - 15

SP - 15

EP - 24

JO - Expert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy

JF - Expert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy

SN - 1477-9072

IS - 1

ER -

Minimally invasive mitral repair surgery: why does controversy still persist?

Abstract

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Cite this