Midulla P S, Ergin A, Galla J, Lansman S L, Sadeghi A M, Levy M, Griepp R B
Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, New York 10029.
J Card Surg. 1994 Sep;9(5):466-81. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8191.1994.tb00879.x.
Since the original description of composite replacement of the aortic valve and ascending aorta by Bentall in 1968, several modifications of the technique have been described. In order to evaluate the results of these different techniques, we have retrospectively reviewed our results with 140 consecutive patients who underwent Bentall operations between October 1986 and March 1994, using three different anastomotic techniques: Classic, n = 30; Button, n = 95, and Cabrol, n = 15. Overall hospital mortality was 5%. In univariate analysis, acute type A dissection, rupture, new preoperative neurological symptoms, and the Cabrol technique were associated with a higher hospital mortality, but by multivariate analysis no independent risk factors were demonstrated. Overall rates of reoperation did not differ among the three techniques (Classic 4.1%/pt-yr, Button 2.7%/pt-yr, Cabrol 0%/pt-yr; p = 0.44). The actuarial freedom from reoperation was 87% at 5 years. The 5-year actuarial survival for all patients was 79% (Classic 85%, Button 82%, Cabrol 52%): the poorer results with the Cabrol modification are likely due to patient selection, complicated by a higher early mortality in this small group of patients. The presence of dissection was associated with a higher mortality in Marfan patients (50% vs 8%, p = 0.03). The rate of aortic valve-related complications was 3.6%/pt per year. Actuarial event-free survival was 67% at 5 years. Current indications for an elective Bentall procedure include an ascending aortic diameter of 6 cm or greater, with significant aortic valvular dysfunction, and dilatation of the ascending aorta greater than 5 cm in patients with Marfan syndrome or a bicuspid aortic valve. The routine procedure of choice is the Button Bentall technique, with the Classic Bentall and the Cabrol variation reserved for use under special circumstances.
自1968年Bentall首次描述主动脉瓣及升主动脉复合置换术以来,该技术已出现多种改良方法。为评估这些不同技术的效果,我们回顾性分析了1986年10月至1994年3月期间连续接受Bentall手术的140例患者的结果,采用了三种不同的吻合技术:经典法(n = 30)、纽扣法(n = 95)和卡布罗法(n = 15)。总体住院死亡率为5%。单因素分析显示,急性A型夹层、破裂、术前新出现的神经症状以及卡布罗技术与较高的住院死亡率相关,但多因素分析未显示出独立的危险因素。三种技术的再次手术总体发生率无差异(经典法4.1%/患者年,纽扣法2.7%/患者年,卡布罗法0%/患者年;p = 0.44)。5年再次手术的精算自由度为87%。所有患者的5年精算生存率为79%(经典法85%,纽扣法82%,卡布罗法52%):卡布罗改良法效果较差可能是由于患者选择因素,该小部分患者早期死亡率较高。夹层的存在与马凡综合征患者较高的死亡率相关(50%对8%,p = 0.03)。主动脉瓣相关并发症的发生率为每年3.6%/患者。5年无事件精算生存率为67%。择期Bentall手术的当前适应证包括升主动脉直径6 cm或更大、伴有明显主动脉瓣功能障碍,以及马凡综合征或二叶式主动脉瓣患者升主动脉扩张大于5 cm。常规首选的手术方法是纽扣法Bentall技术,经典法Bentall和卡布罗法变体则留作特殊情况使用。