Kim Joon Bum, Sundt Thoralf M
1 Division of Cardiac Surgery and Thoracic Aorta Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA ; 2 Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2014 Jul;3(4):406-12. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2225-319X.2014.06.02.
Arch extension of aortic dissection (AD) is reported to occur in 4-25% of patients presenting with acute type B AD. The DeBakey and Stanford classifications do not specifically account for this subset, however, recent studies have demonstrated that the prognosis of patients with arch extension in acute type B AD is virtually identical to that of others with type B AD. In this sense, it seems reasonable to extend the general management principles that are applied to classic acute type B AD even to patients with arch extension. This may be because even in patients with arch extension, most complications occur at locations distal to the arch, and therefore treatment of these patients is similar to that of complicated type B AD, namely thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Conversely, 10% of patients with acute type B AD and arch extension develop complications that are directly related to the arch pathology. This clinical scenario generally necessitates surgical arch repair through a sternotomy approach. The frozen elephant trunk technique combined with arch repair is a very reasonable option to treat this unique clinical entity that involves relatively distal locations of the aortic diseases. Combined arch and descending aorta replacement through thoracotomy is an alternative option particularly when the anatomical features of the target lesions are not suitable for a sternotomy approach or TEVAR. Nonetheless, the reported mortality associated with this approach has been exceedingly high. Hybrid arch repair is another consideration in treating these patients to reduce the treatment-related mortality and morbidity, especially when the arch pathology is limited to the distal part. Nevertheless, the safety and efficacy of this procedure in cases with more extensive arch involvement needs to be assessed in further studies in comparison with other treatment modalities.
据报道,急性B型主动脉夹层(AD)患者中主动脉弓部扩展的发生率为4% - 25%。DeBakey和Stanford分类并未特别针对这一亚组情况,然而,近期研究表明,急性B型AD合并主动脉弓部扩展患者的预后与其他B型AD患者几乎相同。从这个意义上讲,将适用于典型急性B型AD的一般管理原则扩展至主动脉弓部扩展患者似乎是合理的。这可能是因为即使在主动脉弓部扩展的患者中,大多数并发症发生在主动脉弓远端部位,因此这些患者的治疗与复杂B型AD患者相似,即采用胸主动脉腔内修复术(TEVAR)。相反,10%的急性B型AD合并主动脉弓部扩展患者会出现与主动脉弓病变直接相关的并发症。这种临床情况通常需要通过胸骨切开术进行主动脉弓修复手术。冷冻象鼻技术联合主动脉弓修复是治疗这种涉及主动脉疾病相对远端部位的独特临床实体的非常合理的选择。通过开胸手术联合主动脉弓和降主动脉置换是另一种选择,特别是当目标病变的解剖特征不适合胸骨切开术或TEVAR时。尽管如此,报道的与这种方法相关的死亡率一直极高。杂交主动脉弓修复是治疗这些患者的另一种考虑,以降低治疗相关的死亡率和发病率,特别是当主动脉弓病变仅限于远端部分时。然而,与其他治疗方式相比,该手术在主动脉弓受累更广泛的病例中的安全性和有效性需要在进一步研究中进行评估。