Cardiac Surgery 2025 Reviewed

For the 12th consecutive time, we systematically reviewed the cardio-surgical literature for the past year, using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses approach for a results-oriented summary. In 2025, the discussion on the value of randomized and observational evidence continued, showing converging results in the treatment of coronary artery disease and further diverging results in the field of invasive aortic valve therapies. Across randomized trials, meta-analyses, and registries, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) consistently provides superior long-term outcomes compared with percutaneous coronary intervention in complex coronary artery disease, driven primarily by sustained reductions in future myocardial infarctions. In addition, atrial fibrillation after CABG was shown to be more frequent than expected, but its long-term burden was negligible, while prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy after CABG for acute coronary syndrome offered no benefit but increased bleeding risk. The "valve treatment arena" in 2025 was heavily affected by the new guidelines, which clarified many aspects in mitral and tricuspid valve treatment but generated great controversy for aortic stenosis treatment. The latter was based on a reduction of the age cut-off for transcatheter aortic valve implantation to 70 years (unsupported by new data) and the selective reliance on only randomized studies (despite contradictory risk-adjusted registry evidence). Across mitral and tricuspid valve disease, publications showed improvements in symptoms and quality of life without survival benefits with transcatheter therapies and the most consistent long-term outcomes with surgery, particularly when appropriately timed and performed in experienced centers. This article summarizes publications perceived as important by us. It cannot be complete nor free of individual interpretation, but it provides up-to-date information for patient-specific decision-making.