Lim, Ju Y; Deo, Salil V; Altarabsheh, Salah E; Jung, Sung H; Erwin, Patricia J; Markowitz, Alan H; Park, Soon J
Journal of cardiac surgery
2015Feb ; 30 ( 2 ) :125-34.
PMID : 25533177
ÀúÀÚ »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
Lim, Ju Y -
Deo, Salil V -
Altarabsheh, Salah E -
Jung, Sung H -
Erwin, Patricia J -
Markowitz, Alan H -
Park, Soon J -
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (mAVR) is increasingly preferred over conventional AVR (cAVR). However, data comparing these procedures present conflicting results. Hence, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing clinical results in these cohorts. METHOD: Only randomized controlled trials (RCT) and propensity-matched observational studies (POS) (1998-2013) comparing clinical outcome of patients subjected to mAVR or cAVR were pooled. Continuous data was compared using mean/standardized mean difference (MD/SMD) while categorical results were pooled to obtain an odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval.
RESULTS: A total of 18 studies (6 RCT and 12 POS) (1973 mAVR patients; 2697 cAVR patients) were analyzed. The mean ischemic time was significantly longer with mAVR (MD 9.42 minutes [4.25-14.59]; p?
na
MESH
Aged, Aortic Valve/*surgery, Cohort Studies, Databases, Bibliographic, Female, Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/*methods, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/*methods, Propensity Score, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
¸µÅ©