RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To report treatment outcomes in patients with congenital aortic arch disease. MATERIAL AND METHODS: There were 65 patients (45 boys and 20 girls) for the period from 2005 to 2019. Mean age of patients was 53±12 days (range 1-98), weight - 3,3±1,3 kg (range 2.2-4.6). All patients were divided into 2 groups depending on the method of surgical repair. The 1st group included 33 patients who underwent patch repair, the 2nd group (n=32) - anastomosis in end-to-side fashion. RESULTS: In group I, recurrent aortic arch coarctation was observed in 16.8% of cases, in group II - only in 4% of cases (p=0.02). Analysis of systolic pressure in both groups revealed that arterial hypertension was detected in 39% of cases in group I and only in 9,1% of cases in group II (p=0,0025). CONCLUSION: Surgical treatment of aortic arch disease using anastomosis in end-to-side fashion is associated with reduced risk of recurrent aortic arch coarctation and residual arterial hypertension in long-term postoperative period.
Assuntos
Aorta Torácica , Coartação Aórtica , Anastomose Cirúrgica , Pressão Sanguínea , Feminino , Humanos , Lactente , Recém-Nascido , Masculino , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
AIM: To evaluate effectiveness and safety of various methods of cerebral and visceral protection during aortic arch surgery in infants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis included 60 patients after aortic arch repair followed by different cerebral protection technique who have been assessed for neurological status and visceral injury in early and long-term postoperative period. Aortic arch surgery with deep hypothermic circulatory arrest for congenital diseases was performed in 26 patients (group 1) and antegrade unilateral selective cerebral perfusion in 34 patients (group 2). RESULTS: Cerebral complications occurred in 28.5% of patients of the 1st group and in 7.9% of patients of the 2nd group. CONCLUSION: Odds ratio for neurological event is significantly lower in group 2: 0.17 (0.06-0.69; p=0.02). However, there were more patients with renal dysfunction in this group compared with group 1: 58.7% vs. 23.7% (p=0.02).