Is ministernotomy superior to conventional approach for aortic valve replacement?

27Citations
Citations of this article
18Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was: is ministernotomy superior to conventional approach for aortic valve replacement (AVR)? Altogether, more than 115 papers were found using the reported search, of which six represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. We conclude that ministernotomy can be performed safely for AVR, without increased risk of death or other major complication; however, few objective advantages have been shown. Ministernotomy can be offered on the basis of patient choice and cosmesis rather than evident clinical benefit.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Scarci, M., Young, C., & Fallouh, H. (2009). Is ministernotomy superior to conventional approach for aortic valve replacement? Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, 9(2), 314–317. https://doi.org/10.1510/icvts.2009.209445

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free