Başkent University Konya Application and Research Center Department of Cardiovascular Surgery Konya Turkey Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Konya Application and Research Center, Başkent University, Konya, Turkey.
Başkent University Konya Application and Research Center Department of Pediatric Cardiology Konya Turkey Department of Pediatric Cardiology, Konya Application and Research Center, Başkent University, Konya, Turkey.
Braz J Cardiovasc Surg. 2023 May 4;38(3):375-380. doi: 10.21470/1678-9741-2022-0059.
We compared transatrial closure, tricuspid valve septal detachment, and tricuspid valve chordal detachment techniques for ventricular septal defect (VSD) closure.
Patients who had VSD closure with three different techniques in our clinic between September 2016 and December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 117 patients were included in the study. The patients were divided into three groups: group 1, classical transatrial closure; group 2, closure with tricuspid valve septal detachment; and group 3, closure with tricuspid valve chordal detachment. The groups were evaluated by serial transthoracic echocardiography (preoperative, postoperative 1st day, postoperative 1st month). Cardiac rhythm checks and recordings were performed.
No residual VSD was observed in early or late periods in any of the groups whose VSD closure was performed with the three different techniques. No severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR) was detected during the early and late postoperative periods of all operating procedures. When the groups were compared in terms of early/late TR after the operation (without TR+trace amount of TR and mild TR+moderate TR were compared), no statistically significant difference was found (P>0,05; P=0,969 and P>0,05; P=0,502).
In this study, we found no statistically significant difference between three VSD closure techniques in terms of early TR, late TR, residual VSD, and permanent atrioventricular complete block during postoperative period. We hope that our results will be supported by the results of researches that are being made about this subject in large series.
我们比较了经房间隔闭合、三尖瓣隔瓣游离缘切开和三尖瓣腱索切断技术在室间隔缺损(VSD)闭合中的应用。
回顾性分析了 2016 年 9 月至 2020 年 12 月在我院行三种不同技术 VSD 闭合的患者。共纳入 117 例患者。患者分为三组:组 1,经典经房间隔闭合;组 2,三尖瓣隔瓣游离缘切开闭合;组 3,三尖瓣腱索切断闭合。三组均通过连续经胸超声心动图(术前、术后第 1 天、术后第 1 个月)进行评估。进行心律失常检查和记录。
三组患者经不同技术行 VSD 闭合后,均未见早期或晚期残余 VSD。所有手术过程的早期和晚期均未发现严重三尖瓣反流(TR)。当比较三组术后早期/晚期 TR 时(无 TR+微量 TR 和轻度 TR+中度 TR 进行比较),无统计学差异(P>0.05;P=0.969 和 P>0.05;P=0.502)。
本研究中,三种 VSD 闭合技术在术后早期 TR、晚期 TR、残余 VSD 和永久性完全性房室传导阻滞方面无统计学差异。我们希望我们的结果能得到正在进行的关于这一主题的大型系列研究结果的支持。