Yamabe Tsuyoshi, Zhao Yanling, Kurlansky Paul A, Patel Virendra, George Isaac, Smith Craig R, Takayama Hiroo
Division of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, New York Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY.
Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Shonan-Kamakura General Hospital, Kamakura, Kanagawa, Japan.
JTCVS Open. 2022 Aug 7;12:1-12. doi: 10.1016/j.xjon.2022.07.013. eCollection 2022 Dec.
There are few data to delineate the risk differences among open aortic procedures. We aimed to investigate the influence of the procedural types on the outcomes of proximal thoracic aortic aneurysm repair.
Among 1900 patients who underwent aortic replacement in our institution between 2005 and 2019, 1132 patients with aortic aneurysm who underwent a graft replacement of proximal thoracic aorta were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into 4 groups based on the extent of the aortic replacement: isolated ascending aortic replacement (n = 52); ascending aortic replacement with distal extension with hemiarch, partial arch, or total arch replacement (n = 126); ascending aortic replacement with proximal extension with aortic valve or root replacement (n = 620); and ascending aortic replacement with distal and proximal extension (n = 334). "Eventful recovery," defined as occurrence of any key complications, was used as the primary end point. Odds ratios for inability to achieve uneventful recovery in each procedure were calculated using ascending aortic replacement as a reference.
Overall, in-hospital mortality and stroke occurred in 16 patients (1.4%) and 24 patients (2.1%). Eventful recovery was observed in 19.7% of patients: 11.5% in those with ascending aortic replacement, 36.5% in those with partial arch or total arch replacement, 16.6% in those with proximal extension with aortic valve or root replacement, and 20.4% in those with distal and proximal extension ( < .001). With ascending aortic replacement as the reference, a multivariable logistic regression revealed partial arch or total arch replacement (odds ratio, 10.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.8-189.5) was an independent risk factor of inability to achieve uneventful recovery.
Open proximal aneurysm repair in the contemporary era resulted in satisfactory in-hospital outcomes. Distal extension was associated with a higher risk for postoperative complications.
目前鲜有数据来描述开放性主动脉手术之间的风险差异。我们旨在研究手术类型对近端胸主动脉瘤修复结果的影响。
在2005年至2019年间于我院接受主动脉置换术的1900例患者中,对1132例行近端胸主动脉移植置换术的主动脉瘤患者进行回顾性分析。根据主动脉置换范围将患者分为4组:单纯升主动脉置换术(n = 52);升主动脉置换术伴远端延伸,包括半弓、部分弓或全弓置换术(n = 126);升主动脉置换术伴近端延伸,包括主动脉瓣或根部置换术(n = 620);升主动脉置换术伴远端和近端延伸(n = 334)。将“恢复过程中有意外情况”定义为发生任何关键并发症,并将其用作主要终点。以升主动脉置换术作为对照,计算每种手术中无法实现平稳恢复的比值比。
总体而言,16例患者(1.4%)发生院内死亡,24例患者(2.1%)发生卒中。19.7%的患者恢复过程中有意外情况:升主动脉置换术患者中为11.5%,部分弓或全弓置换术患者中为36.5%,近端延伸伴主动脉瓣或根部置换术患者中为16.6%,远端和近端延伸患者中为20.4%(P <.001)。以升主动脉置换术作为对照,多变量逻辑回归显示部分弓或全弓置换术(比值比,10.0;95%置信区间,1.8 - 189.5)是无法实现平稳恢复的独立危险因素。
当代开放性近端动脉瘤修复术的院内结局令人满意。远端延伸与术后并发症风险较高相关。