These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
24. Long-term outcomes following minimal invasive versus conventional aortic valve replacement: a propensity match analysis. Gasparovic I; Artemiou P; Hudec V; Hulman M Bratisl Lek Listy; 2017; 118(8):479-484. PubMed ID: 29050486 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement Via Right Anterior Mini-Thoracotomy: Propensity Matched Initial Experience. Seitz M; Goldblatt J; Paul E; Marcus T; Larobina M; Yap CH Heart Lung Circ; 2019 Feb; 28(2):320-326. PubMed ID: 29291961 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Sutureless Valve Implantation via Mini J-Sternotomy: A Single Center Experience with 2 Years Mean Follow-up. Fischlein T; Pfeiffer S; Pollari F; Sirch J; Vogt F; Santarpino G Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2015 Sep; 63(6):467-71. PubMed ID: 26177222 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Minimally invasive aortic valve surgery. A safe and useful technique beyond the cosmetic benefits. Paredes FA; Cánovas SJ; Gil O; García-Fuster R; Hornero F; Vázquez A; Martín E; Mena A; Martínez-León J Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed); 2013 Sep; 66(9):695-9. PubMed ID: 24773674 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement: Cost-Benefit Analysis of Ministernotomy Versus Minithoracotomy Approach. Hassan M; Miao Y; Maraey A; Lincoln J; Brown S; Windsor J; Ricci M J Heart Valve Dis; 2015 Sep; 24(5):531-9. PubMed ID: 26897831 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement through a transverse sternotomy: a word of caution. Bridgewater B; Steyn RS; Ray S; Hooper T Heart; 1998 Jun; 79(6):605-7. PubMed ID: 10078090 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Mini-Stern Trial: A randomized trial comparing mini-sternotomy to full median sternotomy for aortic valve replacement. Nair SK; Sudarshan CD; Thorpe BS; Singh J; Pillay T; Catarino P; Valchanov K; Codispoti M; Dunning J; Abu-Omar Y; Moorjani N; Matthews C; Freeman CJ; Fox-Rushby JA; Sharples LD J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2018 Dec; 156(6):2124-2132.e31. PubMed ID: 30075959 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Stonehenge technique is associated with faster aortic clamp time in group of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement via right infra-axillary thoracotomy. Yamazaki M; Yoshitake A; Takahashi T; Ito T; Kimura N; Hirano A; Iida Y; Takanashi S; Shimizu H Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2018 Dec; 66(12):700-706. PubMed ID: 30117124 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Propensity score analysis of outcomes following minimal access versus conventional aortic valve replacement. Shehada SE; Öztürk Ö; Wottke M; Lange R Eur J Cardiothorac Surg; 2016 Feb; 49(2):464-9; discussion 469-70. PubMed ID: 25732967 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (AVR) compared to standard AVR. Liu J; Sidiropoulos A; Konertz W Eur J Cardiothorac Surg; 1999 Nov; 16 Suppl 2():S80-3. PubMed ID: 10613563 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Non-sutureless minimally invasive aortic valve replacement: mini-sternotomy versus mini-thoracotomy: a series of 1130 patients. Fattouch K; Moscarelli M; Del Giglio M; Albertini A; Comoglio C; Coppola R; Nasso G; Speziale G Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg; 2016 Aug; 23(2):253-8. PubMed ID: 27160409 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Reoperative aortic valve replacement in the octogenarians-minimally invasive technique in the era of transcatheter valve replacement. Kaneko T; Loberman D; Gosev I; Rassam F; McGurk S; Leacche M; Cohn L J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2014 Jan; 147(1):155-62. PubMed ID: 24183906 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Propensity matched analysis of minimally invasive versus conventional isolated aortic valve replacement. Oo S; Khan A; Chan J; Juneja S; Caputo M; Angelini G; Rajakaruna C; Vohra HA Perfusion; 2023 Mar; 38(2):261-269. PubMed ID: 34515578 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Rapid-Deployment Versus Conventional Bio-Prosthetic Aortic Valve Replacement. Smith AL; Shi WY; Rosalion A; Yii M; O'Keefe M; Newcomb AE; Davis P Heart Lung Circ; 2017 Feb; 26(2):187-193. PubMed ID: 27523460 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Trainees can learn minimally invasive aortic valve replacement without compromising safety. Soppa G; Yates M; Viviano A; Smelt J; Valencia O; van Besouw JP; Jahangiri M Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg; 2015 Apr; 20(4):458-62. PubMed ID: 25568258 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Manubrium-limited ministernotomy versus conventional sternotomy for aortic valve replacement (MAVRIC): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Akowuah E; Goodwin AT; Owens WA; Hancock HC; Maier R; Kasim A; Mellor A; Khan K; Murphy G; Mason J Trials; 2017 Jan; 18(1):46. PubMed ID: 28129780 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Surgical results of aortic valve replacement via partial upper sternotomy: comparison with median sternotomy. Masiello P; Coscioni E; Panza A; Triumbari F; Preziosi G; Di Benedetto G Cardiovasc Surg; 2002 Aug; 10(4):333-8. PubMed ID: 12359403 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]