A systematic review of minimally invasive surgical treatment for atrial fibrillation: a comparison of the Cox-Maze procedure, beating-heart epicardial ablation, and the hybrid procedure on safety and efficacy
- PMID: 25567961
- DOI: 10.1093/ejcts/ezu536
A systematic review of minimally invasive surgical treatment for atrial fibrillation: a comparison of the Cox-Maze procedure, beating-heart epicardial ablation, and the hybrid procedure on safety and efficacy
Abstract
There is a growing trend to perform off-bypass surgical ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) because it is perceived to be safer and more effective than the Cox-Maze procedure with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) support. In this systematic review, we compared three minimally invasive stand-alone surgical ablation procedures for AF: the endocardial Cox-Maze procedure, epicardial surgical ablation and a hybrid epicardial surgical and catheter-based endocardial ablation procedure (hybrid procedure). Relevant studies were identified in MEDLINE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. From 565 initial studies, 37 were included in this review. The total number of patients across all studies was 1877 (range 10-139). Two studies reported on endocardial Cox-Maze procedures (n = 145), 26 reported on epicardial surgical ablation (n = 1382) and 9 reported on hybrid surgical ablation (n = 350). For minimally invasive Cox-Maze, epicardial and hybrid groups, operative mortality rates were 0, 0.5 and 0.9%, perioperative permanent pacemaker insertion rates were 3.5, 2.7 and 1.5%, incidence of conversion to median sternotomy was 0, 2.4 and 2.5%, and reoperation for bleeding was 1.0, 1.5 and 2.2%, with mean length of stay (days) of 5.4, 6.0 and 4.6, respectively. At 12 months, rates of sinus rhythm restoration were 93, 80 and 70%, and sinus restoration without anti-arrhythmic medications was 87, 72 and 71%, for Cox-Maze, epicardial and hybrid procedures, respectively. Of the three procedures, the minimally invasive Cox-Maze procedure with CPB support was most effective for the treatment of stand-alone AF and had important safety advantages in conversion to sternotomy and major bleeding. The minimally invasive Cox-Maze procedure with CPB support also demonstrated the potential for a higher success rate 12 months following the procedure.
Keywords: Atrial fibrillation; Minimally invasive procedures; Surgical ablation.
© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.
Comment in
-
Reply to Phan and Yan.Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2015 Sep;48(3):515-6. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezv110. Epub 2015 Apr 2. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2015. PMID: 25838457 No abstract available.
-
Minimally invasive Cox-maze procedure, beating-heart epicardial ablation, hybrid procedure and catheter ablation: a call for comparative evidence.Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2015 Sep;48(3):515. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezv109. Epub 2015 Apr 2. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2015. PMID: 25838459 No abstract available.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical