loading page

Comparative efficacy of 5 surgical methods in the treatment of mitral regurgitation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
  • +2
  • Weimin Huang,
  • Biao Hou,
  • Yuhai Zhang,
  • Qin Li,
  • Liang Wang
Weimin Huang
Baotou Clinical Medical College of Inner Mongolia Medical University

Corresponding Author:[email protected]

Author Profile
Yuhai Zhang
Author Profile
Liang Wang
Author Profile


Objective This study has been compared the effectiveness of different surgical methods in the treatment of mitral regurgitation (MR) in adults by using network meta-analysis method, so as to provide reference for clinical selection of the best surgical scheme. Methods The PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CNKI and Chongqing VIP Information databases were comprehensively searched until December 2020. We collected retrospective comparative studies on surgical procedures including 3D endoscopic mitral valve surgery(3D-MVS), robot assisted mitral valve surgery(R-MVS); totally thoracoscopic mitral valve surgery(T-MVS), small incision mitral valve surgery (M-MVS) and traditional thoracotomy mitral valve surgery(C-MVS). Addis1.16.8 software was used for network meta-analysis. Results A total of 31 studies were included, 12998 patients, involving 5 surgical methods. Network Meta analysis showed that: in terms of complications (OR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.13 to 3.00, probability rank = 0.37) and mitral regurgitation (OR:0.03, 95%CI: 0.0 to 8315, probability rank=0.64), the 3D-MVS group had the lowest event rate. In terms of blood transfusion rate (OR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.16 to 1.84, probability rank=0.45), T-MVS had the lowest event rate. In addition, with the exception of operation time and chest drainage, the R-MVS group has the best curative effect. Conclusion These minimally invasive surgery has their own advantages and disadvantages. Overall, 3D-MVS is most satisfactory, but more samples are needed.
20 Aug 2021Submitted to Journal of Cardiac Surgery
20 Aug 2021Submission Checks Completed
20 Aug 2021Assigned to Editor
22 Aug 2021Reviewer(s) Assigned
06 Sep 2021Review(s) Completed, Editorial Evaluation Pending
06 Sep 2021Editorial Decision: Revise Major
19 Sep 20211st Revision Received
20 Sep 2021Submission Checks Completed
20 Sep 2021Assigned to Editor
20 Sep 2021Reviewer(s) Assigned
07 Oct 2021Review(s) Completed, Editorial Evaluation Pending
08 Oct 2021Editorial Decision: Accept