Comparison of left ventricular outflow tract obstruction in interruption of the aortic arch and in coarctation of the aorta, with diagnostic, developmental, and surgical implications

2000 ◽  
Vol 86 (8) ◽  
pp. 856-862 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacqueline Kreutzer ◽  
Richard Van Praagh
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 706-714
Author(s):  
Mehmet A. Onalan ◽  
Bahar Temur ◽  
Selim Aydın ◽  
Dilek Suzan ◽  
Ibrahim H. Demir ◽  
...  

Objectives Interrupted aortic arch (IAA) includes a broad spectrum of associated anomalies. In this study, we present our surgical management and patient-specific decisions regarding IAA anomalies with early- and mid-term outcomes. Methods The medical records of 25 patients undergoing IAA repair between 2014 and 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Sixteen patients had type B (64%) interruptions, 7 had type A (28%) interruptions, and 2 had type C (8%) interruptions. Fourteen patients had an isolated ventricular septal defect, and 3 of them had associated left ventricular outflow tract obstruction. Other associated anomalies were functional single ventricle (n = 5), Taussig–Bing anomaly (n = 3), aortopulmonary window (n = 1), multiple ventricular septal defects (n = 1), and truncus arteriosus with dextrocardia (n = 1). The initial operation age was 17.2 ± 14 (range: 1 - 60) days. Results Single-stage total repair was performed for 15 patients. Six patients underwent aortic arch repair and pulmonary artery banding. Four patients with left ventricular outflow tract obstruction or who were premature underwent the hybrid procedure. The aortic arch repair was performed in 16 cases (64%) by the anterior patch augmentation technique, in 3 cases (12%) by the reverse left subclavian artery flap technique, and in 3 cases (12%) by direct end-to-end anastomosis. Postoperative early mortality occurred in 4 (16%) patients, and sternal closure was delayed in 13 (52%) patients. Three patients who underwent a hybrid procedure due to left ventricular outflow tract obstruction underwent biventricular repair 8 to 13 months later. Eight patients (38%) required reintervention due to arch restenosis during the follow-up period. The mean follow-up was 37.1 ± 21.7 months. Conclusion Planning surgical treatment according to the characteristics of the patients and accompanying anomalies may improve the results.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document