Bryan G Maxwell1, Katherine B Harrington2, Ramin E Beygui2, Daryl A Oakes3. 1. Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD. Electronic address: bmaxwell@jhu.edu. 2. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA. 3. Departments of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether management of acute Stanford type-A aortic dissection differs in patients with congenital anomalies of the aortic arch compared with standard institutional practice. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients from 2001 through 2011. SETTING: Quaternary referral center for surgical management of thoracic aortic disease. PARTICIPANTS: All patients with arch anomalies who underwent surgery for acute Stanford type-A aortic dissection during the study period (n = 43). INTERVENTIONS: Surgical management, anesthetic monitoring, and perfusion strategy were analyzed in a retrospective fashion. No new interventions were undertaken as part of this study. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Management differed most in patients with an aberrant right subclavian artery (n = 5), because the institutional standard of right axillary artery cannulation with left upper extremity arterial pressure monitoring was not possible. In patients with one of two "bovine" arch patterns (n = 32), management differed in the conduct of selective antegrade cerebral perfusion, which could include clamping above or below the takeoff of the left common carotid artery (and, therefore, produced unilateral or bilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion). All patients with a connective tissue disorder exhibited a bovine arch pattern. Management of patients with a right arch (n = 3) reflected the opposite of management for normal anatomy (for patients with traditional mirror-image branching) or opposite that of the aberrant right subclavian group (for patients who had a corresponding aberrant left subclavian artery). CONCLUSIONS: Rational management reflected the anatomic variations observed. These results support the importance of interdisciplinary planning, especially in an emergency, to optimize outcome.
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether management of acute Stanford type-A aortic dissection differs in patients with congenital anomalies of the aortic arch compared with standard institutional practice. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients from 2001 through 2011. SETTING: Quaternary referral center for surgical management of thoracic aortic disease. PARTICIPANTS: All patients with arch anomalies who underwent surgery for acute Stanford type-A aortic dissection during the study period (n = 43). INTERVENTIONS: Surgical management, anesthetic monitoring, and perfusion strategy were analyzed in a retrospective fashion. No new interventions were undertaken as part of this study. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Management differed most in patients with an aberrant right subclavian artery (n = 5), because the institutional standard of right axillary artery cannulation with left upper extremity arterial pressure monitoring was not possible. In patients with one of two "bovine" arch patterns (n = 32), management differed in the conduct of selective antegrade cerebral perfusion, which could include clamping above or below the takeoff of the left common carotid artery (and, therefore, produced unilateral or bilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion). All patients with a connective tissue disorder exhibited a bovine arch pattern. Management of patients with a right arch (n = 3) reflected the opposite of management for normal anatomy (for patients with traditional mirror-image branching) or opposite that of the aberrant right subclavian group (for patients who had a corresponding aberrant left subclavian artery). CONCLUSIONS: Rational management reflected the anatomic variations observed. These results support the importance of interdisciplinary planning, especially in an emergency, to optimize outcome.
Authors: James G Barr; Amir H Sepehripour; Omar A Jarral; Pantelis Tsipas; John Kokotsakis; Antonios Kourliouros; Thanos Athanasiou Journal: Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg Date: 2016-03-21