| Literature DB >> 30625256 |
Hiroshi Kubota1, Hidehito Endo1, Hikaru Ishii1, Hiroshi Tsuchiya1, Norihiko Ohura2, Yu Takahashi3.
Abstract
Which graft material is the optimal graft material for the treatment of aortic graft infections is still a matter of controversy. We used a branched xenopericardial roll graft to replace an infected aortic arch graft as a "rescue" operation. The patient is alive and well 37 months postoperatively without recurrence of the infection and any surgical complication. This procedure may have the possibility to serve as an option for the treatment of aortic arch graft infection.Entities:
Keywords: aorta and great vessels; aortic arch; aortic infection; graft infection; xenopericardial roll graft; xenopericardium
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30625256 PMCID: PMC6590405 DOI: 10.1111/jocs.13986
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Card Surg ISSN: 0886-0440 Impact factor: 1.620
Figure 1Preoperative magnetic resonance image and enhanced computed tomography. A, Multiple fresh mycotic brain infarctions were detected. B, Severe stenosis of the right internal carotid artery was detected. C, Vegetation was detected in the brachiocephalic graft branch. D, Vegetation was detected in the left common carotid branch
Figure 2Schema and steps in the surgical procedure. An infected graft was removed and in situ branched pericardial roll graft replacement was performed to create a neo‐aorta. 1) Distal anastomosis. A branched xenopericardial sheet is formed into a cylinder to enable cross‐clamping after step 4. 2) Anastomosis of the left common carotid artery. 3) Antegrade perfusion. 4) Anastomosis of the innominate artery. 5) Proximal anastomosis
Figure 3Postoperative 3‐dimensional computed tomography image acquired 36 months postoperatively. There are no stenoses, no calcifications, no thrombus formation, and no pseudoaneurysms of the neo‐aorta or its branches