ABSTRACT
@#Objective To analyze the near-term clinical efficacy of two different surgical procedures (Sun's procedure and Debranching combined endovascular stent-graft procedure) to cure Stanford type A aortic dissection, and summarize the clinical experience to help better master the indications of the two surgical procedures. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 46 patients with Stanford A aortic dissection in our hospital between September 2014 and September 2017. There were 39 males and 7 females at age of 20–74 (48.67±11.80) years. According to different surgical methods, the patients were divided into a Sun's procedure group (26 patients) and a debranching combined endovascular stent-graft procedure group (20 patients). The clinical effect of the two groups was compared. Results The debranching combined endovascular stent-graft procedure group was significantly superior to the Sun's group in cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time, aortic cross clamp(ACC) time, intraoperative urine output, postoperative mechanical ventilation time, postoperative 24 h volumes of drain, CICU time, renal function recovery of postoperative 72 h and total hospital stay(P<0.05). The incidence of transient neurological damage after operation in the debranching combined endovascular stent-graft procedure group was significantly lower than that of the Sun's procedure group(P<0.05). The follow-up time ranged from 3 to 36 months. And the follow-up rate was 90.5%. One patient in the Sun's procedure group died of serious pulmonary infection postoperative 30 days. One patient in the debranching combined endovascular stent-graft group was found to have internal leakage in the early postoperative examination and disappeared after 6 months. Sun's procedure group did not find endoleak. All patients during the follow-up time did not appear brain, coagulation disorders, stroke, paraplegia, upper limb ischemia and other complications. Conclusion For Stanford type A aortic dissection, debranching combined surgery may have the risk of postoperative endoleak, but the overall effect is superior to Sun's operation. Therefore, debranching combined surgery should be preferred for the treatment of this type of dissection.
ABSTRACT
@#Objective To summarize the efficacy of different anticoagulation methods during perioperative period of non-cardiac surgery after cardiac valve replacement and to compare the postoperative bleeding-related complications and embolization-related complications. Methods Retrospective analysis of clinical data of 56 patients who underwent non-cardiac surgery after cardiac valve replacement in our hospital from January 2016 to January 2018 was conducted. There were 27 males and 29 females, aged 19-75 (53.56±13.94) years. According to different anticoagulation methods during perioperative period, the patients were divided into a bridging group (32 patients) and a non-bridging group (24 patients). The postoperative hospital stay, the number of patients needing postoperative blood transfusions, bleeding-related complications and embolization-related complications were compared between the two groups. According to the patient’s perioperative embolization risk, each group of patients were divided into a high-risk subgroup, middle-risk subgroup, and low-risk subgroup, and the bleeding-related complications and embolization-related complications in each subgroup were compared. Results The postoperative hospital stay in the bridging group was significantly longer than that in the non-bridging group (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in the number of patients needing postoperative blood transfusions, overall bleeding-related complications and embolization-related complications between the two groups (P>0.05). Subgroup analysis was performed according to the degree of embolization risk in the perioperative period. The incidence of bleeding-related complications of the non-bridging group in the high-risk subgroup was significantly higher than that in the high-risk subgroup of the bridging group (P<0.05). The incidence of bleeding-related complications in the bridging group was similar to that of embolization-related complications, while the rate of bleeding-related complications in the non-bridging group was 7 times higher than that of embolization-related complications. Conclusion Bridging anticoagulation increases the length of postoperative hospital stay, but for patients with high risk factors for embolization, it is more beneficial than continuing oral warfarin during the perioperative period. The incidence of bleeding-related complications associated with continued warfarin therapy is significantly higher than that of embolization-related complications, and hemostatic drugs can be given necessarily.