ABSTRACT
Objective:To compare the mid-term result of two different valve-sparing root replacement techniques in acute type A aortic dissection: including reimplantation and remodeling.Methods:From March 2009 to December 2019, 41 patients with acute type A dissection and root involvement, who underwent a valve-sparing root replacement using reimplantation(36 cases) or remodeling(5 cases) were retrospectively analyzed in current study. The average age was(44.63±11.34) years old, 36 males. The differences of perioperative variables, postoperative aortic insufficiency and postoperative survival were compared between the two groups.Results:Thirty-day mortality for two groups was 2.8% and 20%( P=0.23). Remodeling group was significantly inferior to reimplantation group in terms of blood consumption(red blood cells, plasma and platelets), postoperative mechanical ventilation time, reoperation for bleeding and hemofiltration for acute renal failure. The median follow-up time of 39 discharged survivors was 34.56(3-121) months, and the follow-up rate was 100%. There was no follow-up death, no bleeding or embolism events, and no cardiovascular reoperation. Grade 2 or sever aortic regurgitation in remodeling group was significantly higher than that in reimplantation group( P=0.02). A Cox regression analysis identified that the remodeling technique was the independent risk factors of postoperative aortic regurgitation. Conclusion:Compared with remodeling technique, reimplantation technique has better perioperative and mid-term results in patients with acute type A aortic dissection. The rate of reoperation for bleeding, the blood consumption and the postoperative aortic regurgitation are significantly reduced. The long-term results need further follow-up.
ABSTRACT
Neo-aortic insufficiency associated with root enlargement following an arterial switch operation is a serious late complication. To achieve successful surgical correction of this condition, multiple factors should be considered, including the individual patient's anatomy, the challenging nature of the redo procedure, and the patient's young age. However, limited publications have described the use of valve-sparing techniques for the treatment of neo-aortic insufficiency associated with root enlargement following an arterial switch operation. Herein, we report our recent experience of a valve-sparing aortic root procedure with ascending aorta and hemiarch replacement despite the presence of a discrepancy in leaflet size and nearby severe adhesions.
Subject(s)
Humans , Aorta , Arterial Switch Operation , Coronary Stenosis , Reoperation , ReplantationABSTRACT
Syphilitic aortic aneurysm became rare after the discovery of penicillin. Syphilitic aortitis involves the ascending aorta and dilates the aortic annulus, causing aortic valve regurgitation. We report a case of syphilitic aortic aneurysm with severe aortic valve regurgitation, which was successfully treated with the replacement of the valve-sparing root and the total arch. A 55-year-old man, admitted earlier to another hospital for colon diverticulum, was found to have an aortic arch aneurysm. Enhanced computed tomography revealed the aneurysm of the ascending aorta to the transverse arch aorta with the maximum short diameter of the aneurysm at 68 mm. He also had a saccular aneurysm in the ascending aorta. Although he had never had a history of syphilis, a routine laboratory test for syphilis was positive. That said, we looked upon this case as a syphilitic aortic aneurysm. In preoperative cardiac echography, the aortic regurgitation was severe with mild valve stenosis and mainly due to dilation of the aortic root. We thought the native valve could be spared and replaced both the valve-sparing root and the total arch. He was discharged on the 11th postoperative day without any complications.