The Annals of thoracic surgery · 2019
Surgical Management and Outcomes of the Aortic Root in Acute Type A Aortic Dissection.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Qiu Juntao, Wu Jinlin, Xie Enzehua, Luo Xinjin, Chen Julia Fayanne, Gao Wei, Jiang Wenxiang, Qiu Jiawei, Zhao Rui, Yu Cuntao
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the short- and middle-term outcomes of different aortic root managements in the setting of acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD): aortic root repair (ARR group), untouched aortic root (UAR group), and Bentall procedure (Bentall group).
METHODS: The study enrolled 673 patients (512 men; age 48.8 ± 11.2 years) between 2010 and 2015. Survival, aortic growth, reintervention, and valve function were compared between the 3 groups.
RESULTS: The ages were 50.6 ± 9.9, 49.8 ± 12.2, and 44.0 ± 12.0 years for ARR, UAR, and Bentall groups, respectively (P < .01). The mean follow-up time was 3.0 years (range, 0.5-6.8 years). The aortic root diameters in the groups were 39.0 ± 5.1 mm in ARR, 38.2 ± 4.4 mm in UAR, and 50.3 ± 6.2 mm in Bentall (P < .01). The overall 30-day mortality was 11.7% (79 of 673). There was no difference in 30-day mortality between the 3 groups (P = .58). The estimated aortic root growth rate was 0.60 ± 0.17 mm/y for ARR and 0.50 ± 0.14 mm/y for UAR. During follow-up, 28 patients (4.1%) died. Differences in 5-year survival between the 3 groups did not reach statistical significance (P = .82). Aortic insufficiency greater than grade 2+ developed in 15 patients (2.2%). There was no significant difference between ARR and UAR in freedom from aortic insufficiency greater than grade 2+ (P = .56). None of the patients experienced new dissection or underwent proximal reoperation during the follow-up period.
CONCLUSIONS: Conservative techniques (ARR and UAR) and aggressive root replacement can both be performed with excellent short- and middle-term outcomes in ATAAD. Thus, an individualized approach in managing the aortic root for ATAAD is recommended based on the patient's general condition, root pathology, and the surgeon's preference.
METHODS: The study enrolled 673 patients (512 men; age 48.8 ± 11.2 years) between 2010 and 2015. Survival, aortic growth, reintervention, and valve function were compared between the 3 groups.
RESULTS: The ages were 50.6 ± 9.9, 49.8 ± 12.2, and 44.0 ± 12.0 years for ARR, UAR, and Bentall groups, respectively (P < .01). The mean follow-up time was 3.0 years (range, 0.5-6.8 years). The aortic root diameters in the groups were 39.0 ± 5.1 mm in ARR, 38.2 ± 4.4 mm in UAR, and 50.3 ± 6.2 mm in Bentall (P < .01). The overall 30-day mortality was 11.7% (79 of 673). There was no difference in 30-day mortality between the 3 groups (P = .58). The estimated aortic root growth rate was 0.60 ± 0.17 mm/y for ARR and 0.50 ± 0.14 mm/y for UAR. During follow-up, 28 patients (4.1%) died. Differences in 5-year survival between the 3 groups did not reach statistical significance (P = .82). Aortic insufficiency greater than grade 2+ developed in 15 patients (2.2%). There was no significant difference between ARR and UAR in freedom from aortic insufficiency greater than grade 2+ (P = .56). None of the patients experienced new dissection or underwent proximal reoperation during the follow-up period.
CONCLUSIONS: Conservative techniques (ARR and UAR) and aggressive root replacement can both be performed with excellent short- and middle-term outcomes in ATAAD. Thus, an individualized approach in managing the aortic root for ATAAD is recommended based on the patient's general condition, root pathology, and the surgeon's preference.