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 journalReview articlepeer-review

10 Scopus citations


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 languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)15-24
Number of pages10
JournalExpert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 2 2017
Externally publishedYes


  • endoscopic
  • mini-thoracotomy
  • Minimally invasive
  • mitral valve
  • robotic

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine


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

Cite this