Literature DB >> 12440662

Bioprosthetic valved conduit aortic root reconstruction: the Mount Sinai experience.

Jan D Galla1, Steven L Lansman, David Spielvogel, Oktavijan P Minanov, M Arisan Ergin, Carol A Bodian, Randall B Griepp.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients requiring aortic root reconstruction who are deemed unable to take anticoagulants offer unique challenges to the surgeon. For these patients, we have been manufacturing composite conduits intraoperatively using stented bioprostheses.
METHODS: During the 10-year period from April 1992 until May 2002, 141 patients (105 male, 36 female) from 34 to 88 years of age underwent aortic root reconstruction with biological valved conduits. Diagnoses included dissection (n = 28, 9 acute type A), degenerative (64), atherosclerotic (32), anuloaortic ectasia (9), endocarditis (5), and other causes (3). Preoperative risk factors included hypertension (90), smoking (63), coronary artery disease (48), and diabetes (6). Valved conduits were mainly constructed from pericardial valves and impregnated Dacron grafts. Distal anastomosis was performed open in all cases except 6; the ascending aorta only was replaced in 63 patients, a hemiarch reconstruction was used in 71, and more extensive arch reconstruction in 7. Additional cardiac procedures were performed in 59 patients.
RESULTS: Two deaths occurred in the operating room (biventricular failure). Late hospital mortality was 11 of 141 (7.8%) of which 6 (55%) were cardiac, 2 (18.2%) were infectious, 2 (18.2%) were of other complications and 1 (9.1%) was unknown. Three patients (2.1%) sustained permanent and 3 transient strokes. No structural deterioration of the valve and an approximately 86% freedom from thromboembolic events was observed during 5 years.
CONCLUSIONS: For patients for whom anticoagulation is contraindicated or undesirable, reconstruction of the aortic root with a stented bioprosthetic valved conduit offers an acceptable alternative to mechanical prostheses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12440662     DOI: 10.1016/s0003-4975(02)04144-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg        ISSN: 0003-4975            Impact factor:   4.330


  5 in total

1.  A systematic review and meta-analysis of mechanical vs biological composite aortic root replacement, early and 1-year results.

Authors:  Mohamad Bashir; Amer Harky; Saied Froghi; Benjamin Adams; Megan Garner; Prity Gupta; Aung Oo; Rakesh Uppal
Journal:  Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2017-10-10

2.  The evidence in a Bentall procedure with Valsalva graft: is this standard of care?

Authors:  Ziv Beckerman; Bradley G Leshnower; LaRonica McPherson; Jose N Binongo; Yi Lasanajak; Edward P Chen
Journal:  J Vis Surg       Date:  2018-05-10

3.  Total proximal anastomosis detachment after classical bentall procedure.

Authors:  Aref Rashed; Karoly Gombocz; Andras Vigh; Nasri Alotti
Journal:  Int J Surg Case Rep       Date:  2017-06-27

4.  Aortic root surgery in septuagenarians: impact of different surgical techniques.

Authors:  Nawid Khaladj; Rainer Leyh; Malakh Shrestha; Sven Peterss; Axel Haverich; Christian Hagl
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2009-04-21       Impact factor: 1.637

5.  Brazilian Single-Center Experience with Aortic Root Replacement in 448 Patients: What Is the Best Technique?

Authors:  Fabrício José Dinato; Ricardo Ribeiro Dias; José Augusto Duncan; Fábio Fernandes; Felix José Alvares Ramirez; Charles Mady; Fabio B Jatene
Journal:  Braz J Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2020-12-01
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.