Niederhäuser U, Künzli A, Seifert B, Schmidli J, Lachat M, Zünd G, Vogt P, Turina M
Clinic for Cardiovascular Surgery, City Hospital Triemli, Zurich, Switzerland.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1999 May;15(5):557-63. doi: 10.1016/s1010-7940(99)00079-2.
In acute type A dissection long-term results of conservative aortic root surgery were compared with the outcome of primary valve and/or root replacement.
Between 1985 and 1995, 199 patients (mean age 59 years, 154 men) were operated on. The aortic root was involved in the dissection process and valve incompetence of varying degree was present without exception. Replacement of a proximal aortic segment was standard procedure in all patients. The aortic valve was preserved in 126 patients: commissural suture resuspension (12 patients), root reconstruction with GRF-glue (gelatine-resorcin-formaldehyde/glutaraldehyde-glue) (114 patients). Valve replacement was performed in 73 patients (50 composite grafts, 23 valve prostheses with separate supracoronary grafts). Preoperative risk factors (valve replacement vs. preservation): coronary artery disease (11 vs. 8%, NS), tamponade (18 vs. 17%, NS), unstable hemodynamics (22 vs. 15%, NS), renal failure (4 vs. 6%, NS), neurologic disorder (19 vs. 32%, NS).
The overall early mortality was 23.6% (47/199 patients) and increased after commissural suture resuspension compared with GRF-glue reconstruction (P = NS). Parameters of the early postoperative period did not differ between conservative treatment and root/valve replacement: low cardiac output, 34 versus 38% (P = NS); myocardial infarction, 10 versus 11% (P = NS); hemorrhage, 25 versus 23% (P = NS); duration of intensive care (P = NS). Survival was 61% after 8 years without difference between the two principal treatment groups (P = NS) and between the two conservative subgroups (P = NS). At 2 years, GRF-glue reconstruction had an increased freedom from reoperation on the aortic root (92 vs. 70%, P = 0.0253) and event free survival (77 vs. 41%, P = 0.0224) compared with suture resuspension. Commissural suture resuspension was an independent, significant predictor for reoperation (P = 0.0221, relative risk = 4.7130).
Surgery for acute type A dissection still carries a considerable early risk. Preservation of the aortic root is safe in the absence of Marfan or annuloaortic ectasia, but a certain incidence of reoperations on the aortic valve and the aortic root has to be accepted. Root reconstruction using GRF-glue is the method of choice and is superior to suture resuspension, with a significantly better reoperation-free and event-free survival.
比较急性A型主动脉夹层保守性主动脉根部手术与一期瓣膜和/或根部置换术的长期结果。
1985年至1995年间,对199例患者(平均年龄59岁,男性154例)进行了手术。主动脉根部均参与了夹层过程,无一例外均存在不同程度的瓣膜功能不全。所有患者均采用近端主动脉段置换作为标准手术。126例患者保留了主动脉瓣:瓣叶交界缝合再悬吊术(12例),用GRF胶水(明胶-间苯二酚-甲醛/戊二醛胶水)进行根部重建(114例)。73例患者进行了瓣膜置换(50例采用复合移植物,23例采用带单独冠状动脉上移植物的人工瓣膜)。术前危险因素(瓣膜置换与保留):冠状动脉疾病(11%对8%,无显著性差异)、心包填塞(18%对17%,无显著性差异)、血流动力学不稳定(22%对15%,无显著性差异)、肾衰竭(4%对6%,无显著性差异)、神经功能障碍(19%对32%,无显著性差异)。
总体早期死亡率为23.6%(47/199例患者),与GRF胶水重建相比,瓣叶交界缝合再悬吊术后死亡率增加(P=无显著性差异)。保守治疗与根部/瓣膜置换术后早期参数无差异:低心排血量,分别为34%对38%(P=无显著性差异);心肌梗死,分别为10%对11%(P=无显著性差异);出血,分别为25%对23%(P=无显著性差异);重症监护时间(P=无显著性差异)。8年后生存率为61%,两个主要治疗组之间(P=无显著性差异)以及两个保守亚组之间(P=无显著性差异)无差异。在2年时,与缝合再悬吊术相比,GRF胶水重建术主动脉根部再次手术的自由度增加(92%对70%,P=0.0253),无事件生存率增加(77%对41%,P=0.0224)。瓣叶交界缝合再悬吊术是再次手术的独立显著预测因素(P=0.0221,相对风险=4.7130)。
急性A型主动脉夹层手术仍有相当大的早期风险。在没有马凡综合征或主动脉瓣环扩张的情况下,保留主动脉根部是安全的,但必须接受一定比例的主动脉瓣和主动脉根部再次手术。使用GRF胶水进行根部重建是首选方法,优于缝合再悬吊术,再次手术自由度和无事件生存率显著更高。