Minimally Invasive Access Aortic Arch Surgery

Author(s):  
Nora Goebel ◽  
Daniel Bonte ◽  
Schahriar Salehi-Gilani ◽  
Ragi Nagib ◽  
Adrian Ursulescu ◽  
...  

Objective Median sternotomy is still the standard approach for aortic arch surgery. Minimally invasive techniques promise faster recovery with shorter hospital stay due to thoracic stability, reduced pain, and superior cosmetic results. However, safety is a concern in complex aortic surgery. The aim of our study was to demonstrate that aortic arch surgery via partial upper sternotomy is viable, safe, and equivalent to standard procedure both in terms of its safety and the risk of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events. Methods We interrogated our prospectively collected database and identified a total of 21 nonemergent patients operated on at our center between October 2008 and February 2015. Indication for operation was aneurysmatic disease in 18 and aortic dissection in 3 patients. Data were analyzed for in-hospital mortality, stroke, bleeding complications, and acute kidney injury. Results Mean ± standard deviation age of patients was 69.3 ± 14.4 years, 57.1% were female, and mean ± standard deviation logistic EuroSCORE was 17.0 ± 7.2%. Surgery on the aortic arch comprised proximal arch in 9, hemiarch in 9, and total arch replacement plus frozen elephant trunk in 3 patients. Concomitant procedures included aortic root repair in 10, aortic root replacement in 2, and aortic valve replacement in 3 patients. We lost one patient because of septic shock, no stroke occurred, but a transient neurologic deficit in three and a postoperative delirium in four patients. Re-exploration for bleeding was necessary in two patients, and one patient had acute kidney injury. Conclusions Minimally invasive aortic arch surgery via partial upper sternotomy does not increase the risk of morbidity or mortality. Thus, in experienced hands, it is viable, safe, and therefore favorable and as a result should be offered to more patients.

2019 ◽  
Vol 242 ◽  
pp. 40-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian V. Ghincea ◽  
T. Brett Reece ◽  
Mohamed Eldeiry ◽  
Gavriel F. Roda ◽  
Michael R. Bronsert ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (12) ◽  
pp. 3301-3302
Author(s):  
Benjamin N. Morris ◽  
Adrian L. Lata ◽  
Roger L. Royster

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (12) ◽  
pp. 3321-3328
Author(s):  
Guiyu Lei ◽  
Guyan Wang ◽  
Congya Zhang ◽  
Yimeng Chen ◽  
Xiying Yang

2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (9) ◽  
pp. 1987-1990
Author(s):  
Liu Lan ◽  
Zhang Ying ◽  
Yang Xiaomei ◽  
Zhuang Yamin ◽  
Liu Hua ◽  
...  

Perfusion ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 026765912110148
Author(s):  
Yuki Imamura ◽  
Ryosuke Kowatari ◽  
Yoshiaki Saito ◽  
Takeshi Goto ◽  
Kazuyuki Daitoku ◽  
...  

Introduction: Neurologic complications of open thoracic aortic surgery are devastating problems in patients with severely diseased aortas. This study aimed to clarify whether directing the aortic cannula tip toward the aortic root affects the postoperative cardiac function in patients undergoing open thoracic aortic surgery. Methods: A total of 16 patients who underwent total or partial arch replacement between January 2014 and April 2019 were enrolled and divided into two groups. Ascending aorta perfusion was performed by placing the cannula tip toward the aortic root (reversed direction group, seven patients) or toward the aortic arch (standard direction group, nine patients). Intraoperative and perioperative data, including mortality, morbidity, and postoperative cardiac function, were compared between the groups. Results: There were no hospital deaths or stroke events in either group. The aortic cross-clamping time was 102.4 ± 20.3 minutes in the reversed direction group and 87.1 ± 9.9 minutes in the standard direction group (p = 0.049). Furthermore, the intubation time was 28.4 ± 12.9 hours in the reversed direction group and 12.4 ± 6.8 hours in the standard direction group (p = 0.022). Both times were significantly longer in the reverse direction group. Postoperative serum creatine kinase-MB levels were significantly lower in the reversed direction group (6.2 ± 3.3 U/L vs 13.3 ± 4.8 U/L, respectively, p = 0.006). The cardiac output and cardiac index did not significantly differ. Conclusions: Directing the aortic cannula tip toward the aortic root does not adversely affect the postoperative cardiac function after aortic arch surgery.


2007 ◽  
Vol 134 (6) ◽  
pp. 1554-1561 ◽  
Author(s):  
George J. Arnaoutakis ◽  
Azra Bihorac ◽  
Tomas D. Martin ◽  
Philip J. Hess ◽  
Charles T. Klodell ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document