Journal of cardiac surgery · 2005
Are discrete coronary artery fistulae different from coronary arteriovenous malformations?
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Demirkilic Ufuk, Gunay Celalettin, Bolcal Cengiz, Doganci Suat, Cingoz Faruk, Kuralay Erkan, Tatar Harun
Аннотация
AIM: To delineate whether coronary arteriovenous malformations have different properties than classical discrete coronary artery fistulae.
METHODS: Group 1 included 17 patients with discrete coronary fistula that represents a coronary artery fistula draining into any cardiac chamber. Group 2 included six patients with coronary arteriovenous malformations representing extensive coronary artery malformation. Cardiopulmonary bypass was used in 12 of the Group 1 patients and 5 in Group 2.
RESULTS: There was no operative mortality in either group. Following a hemodynamically nonsignificant residual fistulous communication, which was detected by repeat coronary angiography in Group 2; we changed our surgical technique of suture ligation on beating heart. Then we preferred pulmonary arteriotomy and sutured the orifice of coronary arteriovenous malformations from within the chamber.
CONCLUSIONS: Coronary arteriovenous malformations have different morphology and also complex progression properties when compared with discrete coronary artery fistulae. Surgical repair of coronary arteriovenous malformation should be done by suturing the multiple drainage holes inside the draining chamber. Suture ligation of coronary arteriovenous malformation is difficult due to the fragile vessel.
METHODS: Group 1 included 17 patients with discrete coronary fistula that represents a coronary artery fistula draining into any cardiac chamber. Group 2 included six patients with coronary arteriovenous malformations representing extensive coronary artery malformation. Cardiopulmonary bypass was used in 12 of the Group 1 patients and 5 in Group 2.
RESULTS: There was no operative mortality in either group. Following a hemodynamically nonsignificant residual fistulous communication, which was detected by repeat coronary angiography in Group 2; we changed our surgical technique of suture ligation on beating heart. Then we preferred pulmonary arteriotomy and sutured the orifice of coronary arteriovenous malformations from within the chamber.
CONCLUSIONS: Coronary arteriovenous malformations have different morphology and also complex progression properties when compared with discrete coronary artery fistulae. Surgical repair of coronary arteriovenous malformation should be done by suturing the multiple drainage holes inside the draining chamber. Suture ligation of coronary arteriovenous malformation is difficult due to the fragile vessel.