Xiao-Fu Dai1, Qiang Chen2, Gui-Can Zhang1, Liang-Wan Chen1. 1. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou 350001, PR China. 2. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou 350001, PR China. Electronic address: chenqiang2228@163.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare transthoracic device closure via a minimal lower-sternal incision or minimal right thoracic incision and surgical repair via midsternal incision for perimembranous ventricular septal defect (VSD). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 147 patients with isolated perimembranous VSD who were treated in our hospital from June 2017 to December 2017. According to the therapeutic approaches, the patients were divided into group A(transthoracic device closure via a minimal lower-sternal incision), group B((transthoracic device closure via a minimal right thoracic incision) and group C(surgical repair via midsternal incision). The clinical data of the three groups were statistically analyzed. RESULTS: The three groups of patients had satisfactory outcomes for VSD closure. No complications, including third-degree atrioventricular block, large residual shunt requiring re-operation, newly moderate-severe aortic or tricuspid regurgitation, occluder detachment were reported. Compared with group C, the operative time, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of ICU stay, drainage volume, blood transfusion volume, length of the incision, and length of postoperative hospital stay were significantly lower in the device groups (A and B). CONCLUSION: Transthoracic device closure via a minimal lower-sternal incision or minimal right thoracic incision and surgical repair via midsternal incision are sufficiently safe procedures for the treatment of isolated perimembranous VSD and can achieve satisfactory early clinical efficacy. Both device approaches have the advantages of a quick recovery and good cosmetic appearance of the incision.
OBJECTIVE: To compare transthoracic device closure via a minimal lower-sternal incision or minimal right thoracic incision and surgical repair via midsternal incision for perimembranous ventricular septal defect (VSD). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 147 patients with isolated perimembranous VSD who were treated in our hospital from June 2017 to December 2017. According to the therapeutic approaches, the patients were divided into group A(transthoracic device closure via a minimal lower-sternal incision), group B((transthoracic device closure via a minimal right thoracic incision) and group C(surgical repair via midsternal incision). The clinical data of the three groups were statistically analyzed. RESULTS: The three groups of patients had satisfactory outcomes for VSD closure. No complications, including third-degree atrioventricular block, large residual shunt requiring re-operation, newly moderate-severe aortic or tricuspid regurgitation, occluder detachment were reported. Compared with group C, the operative time, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of ICU stay, drainage volume, blood transfusion volume, length of the incision, and length of postoperative hospital stay were significantly lower in the device groups (A and B). CONCLUSION: Transthoracic device closure via a minimal lower-sternal incision or minimal right thoracic incision and surgical repair via midsternal incision are sufficiently safe procedures for the treatment of isolated perimembranous VSD and can achieve satisfactory early clinical efficacy. Both device approaches have the advantages of a quick recovery and good cosmetic appearance of the incision.