European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery
-
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg · Oct 2015
Review Meta Analysis Comparative StudyA 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.
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. ⋯ 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.