Fulltext

Composite graft replacement of the aortic root in acute dissection

Niederhäuser, Urs ; Rüdiger, Hannes ; Vogt, Paul ; Künzli, Andreas ; Zünd, Gregor ; Turina, Marko

In: European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 1998, vol. 13, no. 2, p. 144-150

Ajouter à la liste personnelle
    Titre
    • Composite graft replacement of the aortic root in acute dissection
    Auteur
    • Niederhäuser, Urs. Clinic for Cardiovascular Surgery, University and City Hospital Triemli, Zurich, Switzerland
    • Rüdiger, Hannes. Clinic for Cardiovascular Surgery, University and City Hospital Triemli, Zurich, Switzerland
    • Vogt, Paul. Clinic for Cardiovascular Surgery, University and City Hospital Triemli, Zurich, Switzerland
    • Künzli, Andreas. Clinic for Cardiovascular Surgery, University and City Hospital Triemli, Zurich, Switzerland
    • Zünd, Gregor. Clinic for Cardiovascular Surgery, University and City Hospital Triemli, Zurich, Switzerland
    • Turina, Marko. Clinic for Cardiovascular Surgery, University and City Hospital Triemli, Zurich, Switzerland
    Type de document
    • Postprint
    Langue
    • Anglais
    Publié dans
    • European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 1998, vol. 13, no. 2, p. 144-150. Elsevier Science B.V.
    Autre version électronique
    Identifiant OAI-PMH
    • oai:doc.rero.ch:290839
    Summary
    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