title: Is ministernotomy superior to conventional approach for aortic valve replacement?
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.
authors.affiliation: Department of Cardiac Surgery, St Thomas Hospital, London, UK. marco.scarci@mac.com
authors.forename: Marco
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Scarci
authors.forename: Christopher
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Young
authors.forename: Hazem
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Fallouh
mesh_terms: D001021:Aortic Valve / Q000601:surgery*; D019985:Benchmarking; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D006349:Heart Valve Diseases / Q000401:mortality / Q000601:surgery*; D019918:Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods* / Q000401:mortality; D006801:Humans; D018579:Patient Selection; D018570:Risk Assessment; D013249:Sternum / Q000601:surgery*; D016896:Treatment Outcome