Haddadin Sulieman, Milano Aldo D, Faggian Giuseppe, Morjan Mohammed, Patelli Fabio, Golia Giorgio, Franchi Pierluigi, Mazzucco Alessandro
Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Verona Medical School, Verona, Italy.
J Card Surg. 2009 Nov-Dec;24(6):624-31. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8191.2009.00896.x.
Left ventricular free wall rupture (LVFWR) is still one of the often fatal complications of acute myocardial infarction. Surgical repair is mandatory even with high operative mortality. The optimal surgical technique is controversial since the results depend on type of rupture. We present our mid-term surgical experience according to the status of the left ventricular tear and type of surgical repair.
From January 1997 to December 2007, 19 consecutive patients with LVFWR were treated at our institution. The mean age was 72 +/- 8 ranging from 53 to 81 years; there were eight males and 11 females. According to the intraoperative findings, patients were divided into two groups: group 1 (eight patients), where no macroscopic tear of the LVFW could be detected with blood oozing from infarcted zone (Oozing type LVFWR); and group 2 (11 patients), where a macroscopic defect of the epicardium, with free communication between left ventricular cavity and pericardial space, was identified (Blow-out type LVFWR). The patch covering and glue technique was applied for group 1 patients, while closure of the ventricular tear either by direct suture or by patch repair was used for group 2 patients.
The interval between diagnosis of LVFWR and surgery was 2.9 +/- 1.1 hours. However, reevaluation of echocardiographic studies showed an early missed diagnosis of LVFWR in three patients of group 1 and in eight of group 2. Thus, the mean interval between initial signs of rupture and surgery was 9 +/- 8 hours and 21 +/- 15 hours, respectively, for oozing and blow-out type rupture. On arrival in the operating room, four patients were on cardiopulmonary resuscitation, while four were in cardiogenic shock. The hospital mortality was 12% (one death) in group 1 and 36% (four deaths) in group 2 mainly due to multiorgan failure. Fourteen patients were discharged with a mean follow-up of 3.8 +/- 3.5 years. During follow-up, one patient in group 1 died after 7.5 years. No recurrence of free wall rupture or aneurysm formation was demonstrated in all cases. At last follow-up, all survivors showed excellent clinical results with a preserved left ventricular function. Patients with oozing type LVFWR and patch covering technique repair showed an absence of left ventricular-restricted motion at the echocardiographic study.
In patients with LVFWR, early diagnosis and surgical treatment are crucial for successful outcome when excellent results can be achieved with a simple glued patch covering technique.
左心室游离壁破裂(LVFWR)仍是急性心肌梗死常见的致命并发症之一。即使手术死亡率高,手术修复仍是必要的。由于结果取决于破裂类型,最佳手术技术存在争议。我们根据左心室撕裂情况和手术修复类型介绍我们的中期手术经验。
1997年1月至2007年12月,我们机构共治疗了19例连续性LVFWR患者。平均年龄为72±8岁,范围从53岁至81岁;男性8例,女性11例。根据术中发现,患者分为两组:第1组(8例患者),梗死区域渗血但未检测到左心室游离壁肉眼可见的撕裂(渗血型LVFWR);第2组(11例患者),发现心外膜有肉眼可见的缺损,左心室腔与心包腔相通(破裂型LVFWR)。第1组患者采用补片覆盖和胶水技术修复,第2组患者则采用直接缝合或补片修复心室撕裂。
LVFWR诊断至手术的间隔时间为2.9±1.1小时。然而,超声心动图检查重新评估显示,第1组3例患者和第2组8例患者早期漏诊LVFWR。因此,渗血型和破裂型破裂患者从破裂初始症状至手术的平均间隔时间分别为9±8小时和21±15小时。到达手术室时,4例患者正在进行心肺复苏,4例处于心源性休克。第1组医院死亡率为12%(死亡1例),第2组为36%(死亡4例),主要原因是多器官功能衰竭。14例患者出院时平均随访3.8±3.5年。随访期间,第1组1例患者在7.5年后死亡。所有病例均未显示游离壁破裂复发或动脉瘤形成。最后一次随访时,所有幸存者临床结果良好且左心室功能保留。渗血型LVFWR且采用补片覆盖技术修复的患者在超声心动图检查中未显示左心室运动受限。
对于LVFWR患者,早期诊断和手术治疗对于获得成功结果至关重要,如果采用简单的胶水补片覆盖技术可取得良好效果。