Comparison of Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery vs Open Mitral Valve Replacement

Abstract

Objective: To establish the advantages of invasive mitral valve surgery over open heart mitral valve surgery in treating patients with mitral valve pathologies. Material and Methods: A literature search was done on PubMed, google scholar, and Embase using search terms like open ‘invasive mitral valve surgery’, ‘mitral clip’, ‘sternotomy’, and ‘annuloplasty.” The time limit was set to 5 years ago and the language set to English. After searching, a quick screening of the title and abstract was done for relevance. The selected papers were then used in this review. Results: The minimally invasive mitral valve surgery was shown to have significantly greater survival rates across all post-surgical time frames as well as lower short-term mortality rates. Mini MVS was also shown to be more effective in treating infective endocarditis and is a highly impractical operation for patients with left ventricular dysfunction or other cardiomyopathies. The Minimally Invasive Mitral valve surgery (Mini MVS) proved to cause fewer mortalities and clearly showed a lower number of complications; the complications that exist are highly preventable. In addition, the mini MVS is more effective in treating patients with mitral regurgitation. Conclusion: This review confirms that employing the minimally invasive MVS procedure for patients with mitral valve pathologies is more effective than the standard open heart MVS in terms of post-surgery mortalities and hospital stay times. It is also more effective in treating patients with preexisting cardiomyopathies. However, sufficient training should be done to prevent complications from arising. The mitraliclp device should be further developed to prevent complications that arise due to the clip attachment