Objective： Mitral valve disease tends to be treated with anterolateral minithoracotomy （ALMT） rather than median stemotomy （MS）, as ALMT uses progressively smaller incisions to promote better cosmetic outcomes. T...Objective： Mitral valve disease tends to be treated with anterolateral minithoracotomy （ALMT） rather than median stemotomy （MS）, as ALMT uses progressively smaller incisions to promote better cosmetic outcomes. This meta-analysis quantifies the effects of ALMT on surgical parameters and post-operative outcomes compared with MS. Methods： One randomized controlled study and four case-control studies, published in English from January 1996 to January 2013, were identified and evaluated. Results： ALMT showed a significantly longer cardiopulmonary bypass time （P=0.001） and aortic cross-clamp time （P=0.05） compared with MS. However, the benefits of ALMT were evident as demonstrated by a shorter length of hospital stay （P〈0.00001）. According to operative complications, the onset of new arrhythmias following ALMT decreased significantly as compared with MS （P=0.05）; however, the incidence of peri-operative mortality （P=0.62）, re-operation for bleeding （P=0.37）, neurologic events （P=0.77）, myocardial infarction （P=0.84）, gastrointestinal complications （P=0.89）, and renal insufficiency （P=0.67） were similar to these of MS. Long-term follow-up data were also examined, and revealed equivalent survival and freedom from mitral valve events. Conclusions： Current clinical data suggest that ALMT is a safe and effective alternative to the conventional approach and is associated with better short-term outcomes and a trend towards longer survival.展开更多
文摘Objective： Mitral valve disease tends to be treated with anterolateral minithoracotomy （ALMT） rather than median stemotomy （MS）, as ALMT uses progressively smaller incisions to promote better cosmetic outcomes. This meta-analysis quantifies the effects of ALMT on surgical parameters and post-operative outcomes compared with MS. Methods： One randomized controlled study and four case-control studies, published in English from January 1996 to January 2013, were identified and evaluated. Results： ALMT showed a significantly longer cardiopulmonary bypass time （P=0.001） and aortic cross-clamp time （P=0.05） compared with MS. However, the benefits of ALMT were evident as demonstrated by a shorter length of hospital stay （P〈0.00001）. According to operative complications, the onset of new arrhythmias following ALMT decreased significantly as compared with MS （P=0.05）; however, the incidence of peri-operative mortality （P=0.62）, re-operation for bleeding （P=0.37）, neurologic events （P=0.77）, myocardial infarction （P=0.84）, gastrointestinal complications （P=0.89）, and renal insufficiency （P=0.67） were similar to these of MS. Long-term follow-up data were also examined, and revealed equivalent survival and freedom from mitral valve events. Conclusions： Current clinical data suggest that ALMT is a safe and effective alternative to the conventional approach and is associated with better short-term outcomes and a trend towards longer survival.
