European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 1996
Radical replacement of the aortic root in acute type A dissection: indications and outcome.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Ergin M A, McCullough J, Galla J D, Lansman S L, Griepp R B
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Failure of the repair at the proximal aorta is an important cause of morbidity and mortality following surgical treatment of acute type A dissection. This review was undertaken to determine the influence of total composite replacement of the ascending aorta and the root on the operative risk and long-term survival.
METHODS: In a consecutive series of 73 patients with acute type A dissections between 1985 and 1994, 19 (26%) patients with radical root replacement (group I) were compared with 54 patients who had conventional valve-preserving root reconstruction (group II).
RESULTS: Group I represented a higher operative risk with the presence of significant aortic regurgitation (13/19 68.4% vs 23/54 42.5% P < 0.05), aortic dilatation (19/19 100% vs 32/54 59.2% P < 0.00), and coronary dissection (13/19 68.4% vs 3/54 5.5% P < 0.000). In spite of this there was no difference in operative mortality (3/19 15.7% vs 7/54 12.9%, NS) or the occurrence of major postoperative complications: bleeding (3/19 15.7% vs 7/54 12.9%, NS), respiratory (5/19 26.3% vs 11/54 20.3%, NS), stroke (2/19 10.5% vs 3/54 5.5%, NS). Patients with radical root replacement had substantially better event-free survival at 5 years (87.5% +/- 11.7% vs 67.1% +/- 8.9%) and 9 years (87.5% +/- 21.9% vs 63.0% +/- 19.2%).
CONCLUSIONS: This experience confirms that, in the treatment of acute type A dissection, an aggressive approach to aortic root pathology is indicated for specific indications, and can be carried out with good early and excellent long-term results.
METHODS: In a consecutive series of 73 patients with acute type A dissections between 1985 and 1994, 19 (26%) patients with radical root replacement (group I) were compared with 54 patients who had conventional valve-preserving root reconstruction (group II).
RESULTS: Group I represented a higher operative risk with the presence of significant aortic regurgitation (13/19 68.4% vs 23/54 42.5% P < 0.05), aortic dilatation (19/19 100% vs 32/54 59.2% P < 0.00), and coronary dissection (13/19 68.4% vs 3/54 5.5% P < 0.000). In spite of this there was no difference in operative mortality (3/19 15.7% vs 7/54 12.9%, NS) or the occurrence of major postoperative complications: bleeding (3/19 15.7% vs 7/54 12.9%, NS), respiratory (5/19 26.3% vs 11/54 20.3%, NS), stroke (2/19 10.5% vs 3/54 5.5%, NS). Patients with radical root replacement had substantially better event-free survival at 5 years (87.5% +/- 11.7% vs 67.1% +/- 8.9%) and 9 years (87.5% +/- 21.9% vs 63.0% +/- 19.2%).
CONCLUSIONS: This experience confirms that, in the treatment of acute type A dissection, an aggressive approach to aortic root pathology is indicated for specific indications, and can be carried out with good early and excellent long-term results.