General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2019
Temporary ventricular assist device implantation by sternotomy-avoiding technique for bridge-to-decision therapy: a comparison with conventional implantation.
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.
Akiyama Masatoshi, Sasaki Konosuke, Kawatsu Satoshi, Suzuki Yusuke, Suzuki Tomoyuki, Yoshioka Ichiro, Takahashi Goro, Kumagai Kiichiro, Adachi Osamu, Saiki Yoshikatsu
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Temporary ventricular assist device (VAD) is a commonly used therapeutic option for cardiogenic shock. Patients requiring this treatment are often critical, and clinical outcomes remain unsatisfactory. This study evaluated the feasibility and efficacy of a sternotomy-avoiding technique for temporary VAD implantation to improve patient outcomes.
METHODS: Between December 2012 and November 2018, seven patients underwent temporary VAD implantation by sternotomy-avoiding technique (SA group) and eight by median sternotomy technique (MS group). Pre- and intraoperative characteristics, postoperative 7-day hemodynamic parameters, 30-day mortality, and adverse events were compared between the groups.
RESULTS: More than 50% of the patients were mechanically supported before temporary VAD implantation. Cardiopulmonary bypass time was significantly shorter in the SA than in the MS group (84 min vs 215 min; p = 0.011); surgical time tended to be shorter in the SA group (385 min vs 461 min; p = 0.064). Pump index, cardiac index, mixed venous oxygen saturation, and central venous pressure did not differ significantly during the first seven days of support. The 30-day incidence of any adverse event was not significantly different between the groups. No patients in the SA group needed re-exploration for surgical bleeding. Thirty-day all-cause mortality rates were 29% in the SA group and 0% in the MS group (p = 0.11).
CONCLUSIONS: The sternotomy-avoiding and conventional techniques resulted in comparable short-term hemodynamic support. The sternotomy-avoiding technique was associated with a potential reduction in risk of re-exploration for bleeding. These results support the usefulness of the sternotomy-avoiding procedure for selected patients.
METHODS: Between December 2012 and November 2018, seven patients underwent temporary VAD implantation by sternotomy-avoiding technique (SA group) and eight by median sternotomy technique (MS group). Pre- and intraoperative characteristics, postoperative 7-day hemodynamic parameters, 30-day mortality, and adverse events were compared between the groups.
RESULTS: More than 50% of the patients were mechanically supported before temporary VAD implantation. Cardiopulmonary bypass time was significantly shorter in the SA than in the MS group (84 min vs 215 min; p = 0.011); surgical time tended to be shorter in the SA group (385 min vs 461 min; p = 0.064). Pump index, cardiac index, mixed venous oxygen saturation, and central venous pressure did not differ significantly during the first seven days of support. The 30-day incidence of any adverse event was not significantly different between the groups. No patients in the SA group needed re-exploration for surgical bleeding. Thirty-day all-cause mortality rates were 29% in the SA group and 0% in the MS group (p = 0.11).
CONCLUSIONS: The sternotomy-avoiding and conventional techniques resulted in comparable short-term hemodynamic support. The sternotomy-avoiding technique was associated with a potential reduction in risk of re-exploration for bleeding. These results support the usefulness of the sternotomy-avoiding procedure for selected patients.