AbstractOBJECTIVESOur goals were to compare the outcome of the intra-atrial lateral tunnel (ILT) and the extracardiac conduit (ECC) techniques for staged total cavopulmonary connection (TCPC) and to compare the current modifications of the TCPC technique, i.e. the prosthetic ILT technique with the current ECC technique with a ≥18-mm conduit.METHODSWe included patients who had undergone a staged TCPC between 1988 and 2008. Records were reviewed for patient demographics, operative details and events during follow-up (death, surgical and catheter-based reinterventions and arrhythmias).RESULTSOf the 208 patients included, 103 had the ILT (51 baffle, 52 prosthetic) technique and 105 had the ECC technique. Median follow-up duration was 13.2 years (interquartile range 9.5–16.3). At 15 years after the TCPC, the overall survival rate was comparable (81% ILT vs 89% ECC; P = 0.12). Freedom from late surgical and catheter-based reintervention was higher for patients who had ILT than for those who had ECC (63% vs 44%; P = 0.016). However, freedom from late arrhythmia was lower for patients who had ILT than for those who had ECC (71% vs 85%, P = 0.034). In a subgroup of patients who had the current TCPC technique, when we compared the use of a prosthetic ILT with ≥18-mm ECC, we found no differences in freedom from late arrhythmias (82% vs 86%, P = 0.64) or in freedom from late reinterventions (70% vs 52%, P = 0.14).CONCLUSIONSA comparison between the updated prosthetic ILT and current ≥18-mm ECC techniques revealed no differences in late arrhythmia-free survival or late reintervention-free survival. Overall, outcomes after the staged TCPC were relatively good and reinterventions occurred more frequently in the ECC group, whereas late arrhythmias were more common in the ILT group.
Do we need fenestration when performing two-staged total cavopulmonary connection using an extracardiac conduit?☆
