Kawaguchi A T, Kosakai Y, Sasako Y, Eishi K, Nakano K, Kawashima Y
National Cardiovascular Center, Suita, Osaka, Japan.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996 Oct;28(4):985-90. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(96)00275-6.
This study sought to identify the risks and benefits of adding the maze procedure in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing operation for underlying organic cardiac disorders.
Persistent AF often leaves patients symptomatic even after otherwise successful cardiac surgery.
Fifty-one patients undergoing valvular operation and the maze procedure (n = 43) or repair of congenital anomalies (n = 8) combined with the maze procedure were compared with 51 patients (control group) matched for underlying diseases and procedures except for the maze operation. Each group, including 31 patients with a concomitant tricuspid annuloplasty and 12 undergoing reoperation, were similar in age, duration of arrhythmia, degree of cardiomegaly and New York Heart Association functional class.
Patients undergoing the maze procedure had longer cardiopulmonary bypass time (213 vs. 144 min, p < 0.0001), longer cardiac arrest (134 vs. 93 min, p < 0.0001) and greater blood loss with longer respiratory care (39 vs. 18 h p = 0.021) and intensive care unit stay but no mortality. No significant differences were found in catecholamine or transfusion requirements immediately after operation. Sustained AF was much less frequent in the maze group (12% at 1 year) than the control group (86%, p < 0.0001), with an average follow-up period of 32 months (range 25 to 42). Atrial contraction was documented in 41 (80%) and 40 (78%) patients for right and left ventricular filling, respectively, after the maze procedure, resulting in a significantly smaller cardiac size and improved functional capacity. Medication was discontinued in seven patients in the maze group compared with two in the control group.
Improved restoration of atrial rhythm and contraction with combined maze operation appeared to justify the increased operative time and complexity and postoperative care.
本研究旨在确定在患有潜在器质性心脏疾病且接受手术治疗的心房颤动(AF)患者中添加迷宫手术的风险和益处。
即使在心脏手术成功后,持续性房颤通常仍会使患者出现症状。
将51例接受瓣膜手术及迷宫手术(n = 43)或先天性畸形修复术(n = 8)并联合迷宫手术的患者与51例(对照组)除未进行迷宫手术外,其他基础疾病和手术相匹配的患者进行比较。每组包括31例行三尖瓣环成形术的患者和12例再次手术的患者,两组在年龄、心律失常持续时间、心脏扩大程度和纽约心脏协会心功能分级方面相似。
接受迷宫手术的患者体外循环时间更长(213分钟对144分钟,p < 0.0001),心脏停搏时间更长(134分钟对93分钟,p < 0.0001),失血量更大,呼吸护理时间更长(39小时对18小时,p = 0.021),重症监护病房停留时间更长,但无死亡病例。术后即刻儿茶酚胺或输血需求方面未发现显著差异。迷宫组持续性房颤的发生率在1年时(12%)远低于对照组(86%,p < 0.0001),平均随访期为32个月(范围25至42个月)。迷宫手术后,分别有41例(80%)和40例(78%)患者记录到右心室和左心室充盈时的心房收缩,心脏大小显著减小,功能能力改善。迷宫组有7例患者停用了药物,而对照组为2例。
联合迷宫手术改善心房节律和收缩的恢复似乎证明增加手术时间、复杂性和术后护理是合理的。