Suppr超能文献

急性主动脉夹层中主动脉根部的复合移植物置换术。

Composite graft replacement of the aortic root in acute dissection.

作者信息

Niederhäuser U, Rüdiger H, Vogt P, Künzli A, Zünd G, Turina M

机构信息

Clinic for Cardiovascular Surgery, University and City Hospital Triemli, Zurich, Switzerland.

出版信息

Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1998 Feb;13(2):144-50. doi: 10.1016/s1010-7940(97)00311-4.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

In acute type A dissection the indication for composite graft replacement of the aortic root and the optimal implantation technique are a matter of debate. In this study early and late results of root replacement in acute dissection are determined and compared with supracoronary graft replacement. Two implantation techniques (open vs. inclusion) are evaluated.

METHODS

Between 1985 and 1995, 207 consecutive patients (mean age 58 +/- 12 years, 78% men) were operated for acute type A dissection of the aorta. Root replacement in 50 patients (inclusion technique in 34/50 patients with Cabrol shunt in 15/34 patients, open technique in 16/50 patients) was compared with more conservative procedures in 157 patients: supracoronary graft replacement in 143 patients (with aortic valve replacement in 23 patients) and local repair without graft interposition in 14 patients. Preoperative risk factors, like hemodynamic instability, renal failure, neurologic disorder and coronary artery disease did not differ in the two treatment groups.

RESULTS

Early results, survival and reoperation-free survival after 5 years were insignificantly better after root replacement: mortality 10/50 (20%) vs. 38/157 (24%) P = n.s.; hemorrhage 10/50 (20%) vs. 39/157 (25%) P = n.s.; stroke 5/50 (10%) vs. 27/157 (17%) P = n.s.; survival 70 +/- 7% vs. 63 +/- 4%, reoperation free survival 92 +/- 6% vs. 78 +/- 5% P = 0.0815). For the open technique, early mortality was 18.8 vs. 20.6%, P = n.s. and reoperation free survival at 5 years was 80.7 vs. 65.2%, P = n.s. Perioperative complications did not differ in the two technical groups and a single pseudoaneurysm occurred in the Bentall group.

CONCLUSION

In acute dissection composite graft replacement of the aortic root can be carried out with good early and late results not inferior to more conservative procedures. The open technique is the implantation method of choice and the modified Bentall technique is indicated in situations with increased risk of bleeding.

摘要

目的

在急性A型主动脉夹层中,主动脉根部复合移植物置换的适应证及最佳植入技术仍存在争议。本研究旨在确定急性主动脉夹层根部置换的早期和晚期结果,并与冠状动脉上移植物置换进行比较。同时评估两种植入技术(开放技术与包埋技术)。

方法

1985年至1995年间,连续207例患者(平均年龄58±12岁,78%为男性)接受了急性A型主动脉夹层手术。将50例患者的根部置换(34/50例采用包埋技术,其中15/34例采用卡布罗分流术,16/50例采用开放技术)与157例患者更为保守的手术进行比较:143例患者行冠状动脉上移植物置换(23例患者同时行主动脉瓣置换),14例患者行局部修复未植入移植物。两个治疗组的术前危险因素,如血流动力学不稳定、肾衰竭、神经功能障碍和冠状动脉疾病等并无差异。

结果

根部置换后的早期结果、生存率及5年后无再次手术生存率略优于其他治疗:死亡率10/50(20%) vs. 38/157(24%),P=无统计学意义;出血10/50(20%) vs. 39/157(25%),P=无统计学意义;卒中5/50(10%) vs. 27/157(17%),P=无统计学意义;生存率70±7% vs. 63±4%,无再次手术生存率92±6% vs. 78±5%,P=0.0815)。对于开放技术,早期死亡率为18.8% vs. 20.6%,P=无统计学意义,5年后无再次手术生存率为80.7% vs. 65.2%,P=无统计学意义。两个技术组的围手术期并发症无差异,Bentall组出现1例假性动脉瘤。

结论

在急性主动脉夹层中,主动脉根部复合移植物置换可取得良好的早期和晚期结果,并不亚于更为保守的手术。开放技术是首选的植入方法,改良Bentall技术适用于出血风险增加的情况。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验