FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4306320565> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4306320565 abstract "Abstract Background Robotic-assisted cardiac surgery has emerged as a popular minimal invasive cardiac surgery approach, as it provides several advantages compared to conventional and other minimally invasive approaches. Mitral valve surgeries, including repair and replacement, are currently the most common cardiac surgeries performed with a robotic approach. However, there are concerns that surgeon's learning curve and prolonged operation time associated with this approach could compromise the surgical outcomes, hence the low acceptance of the technique in the clinical setting. In addition, despite various studies comparing robotic and conventional mitral surgery, it remains unclear whether the former would give comparable, if not better, outcomes. Purpose This study aims to compare the outcomes of robotic and conventional sternotomy mitral valve surgeries. Methods A comprehensive literature search was performed through Pubmed, CENTRAL, and ScienceDirect for studies comparing robotic and sternotomy approach for mitral valve repair and replacement. Studies were screened with our eligibility criteria, and their quality was examined using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The primary outcome analysed in this study was the perioperative mortality. Results Twelve studies involving 4300 patients (2223 experienced robotic surgery) were included. Pooled analysis showed that patients who underwent robotic surgery had a significant decrease in perioperative mortality compared to those who underwent sternotomy surgery (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.18, 0.60, p=0.0003, I2=0%). Moreover, ICU length of stay was also shorter in the robotic group (MD −13.67, 95% CI −20.04, −7.29, p&lt;0.0001, I2=93%). Re-operation risk due to bleeding was not significantly different between both groups (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.79, 1.62, p=0.51, I2=0%). Egger's test result showed no evidence of small-study effects (p=0.83), and the funnel plot appeared symmetrical, meaning there was no publication bias. Conclusion Results from our meta-analysis refute the current concerns limiting the acceptance of robotic approach in mitral valve surgeries, showing significantly lower perioperative mortality and ICU length of stay, as well as a comparable re-operation risk due to bleeding with the conventional approach. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None." @default.
• W4306320565 created "2022-10-16" @default.
• W4306320565 creator A5003003007 @default.
• W4306320565 creator A5008267250 @default.
• W4306320565 creator A5024032611 @default.
• W4306320565 creator A5081450188 @default.
• W4306320565 date "2022-10-01" @default.
• W4306320565 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W4306320565 title "Outcomes comparison between robotic and conventional mitral valve surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis" @default.
• W4306320565 doi "https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac544.2164" @default.
• W4306320565 hasPublicationYear "2022" @default.
• W4306320565 type Work @default.
• W4306320565 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W4306320565 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4306320565 hasAuthorship W4306320565A5003003007 @default.
• W4306320565 hasAuthorship W4306320565A5008267250 @default.
• W4306320565 hasAuthorship W4306320565A5024032611 @default.
• W4306320565 hasAuthorship W4306320565A5081450188 @default.
• W4306320565 hasBestOaLocation W43063205651 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConcept C103203806 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConcept C2775854548 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConcept C2776511277 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConcept C2777543888 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConcept C2778789114 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConcept C2779526774 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConcept C2780679668 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConcept C31174226 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConcept C95190672 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConceptScore W4306320565C103203806 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConceptScore W4306320565C126322002 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConceptScore W4306320565C141071460 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConceptScore W4306320565C2775854548 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConceptScore W4306320565C2776511277 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConceptScore W4306320565C2777543888 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConceptScore W4306320565C2778789114 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConceptScore W4306320565C2779526774 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConceptScore W4306320565C2780679668 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConceptScore W4306320565C31174226 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConceptScore W4306320565C71924100 @default.
• W4306320565 hasConceptScore W4306320565C95190672 @default.
• W4306320565 hasIssue "Supplement_2" @default.
• W4306320565 hasLocation W43063205651 @default.
• W4306320565 hasOpenAccess W4306320565 @default.
• W4306320565 hasPrimaryLocation W43063205651 @default.
• W4306320565 hasRelatedWork W2019946622 @default.
• W4306320565 hasRelatedWork W2074238793 @default.
• W4306320565 hasRelatedWork W2374351425 @default.
• W4306320565 hasRelatedWork W2416072419 @default.
• W4306320565 hasRelatedWork W2942714532 @default.
• W4306320565 hasRelatedWork W3033433411 @default.
• W4306320565 hasRelatedWork W3041558840 @default.
• W4306320565 hasRelatedWork W3185838917 @default.
• W4306320565 hasRelatedWork W4306320565 @default.
• W4306320565 hasRelatedWork W85531761 @default.
• W4306320565 hasVolume "43" @default.
• W4306320565 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4306320565 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4306320565 workType "article" @default.