| Literature DB >> 34317891 |
Stephanie G Berset1, Hitendu Dave2, Christian Balmer2, Anna Nowacka3, Raymond Pfister4, Patrick O Myers4, René Prêtre4.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Surgery for aortic coarctation repair provides excellent hemodynamic results but may be complicated by musculoskeletal issues. The purpose of the study was to determine the midterm results of a muscle-sparing surgical approach to aortic coarctation repair, with special emphasis on the repair and on the musculoskeletal changes associated with a posterior thoracotomy.Entities:
Keywords: children; coarctation of the aorta; muscle-sparing approach
Year: 2020 PMID: 34317891 PMCID: PMC8302918 DOI: 10.1016/j.xjtc.2020.05.005
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JTCVS Tech ISSN: 2666-2507
Figure 1A, Position of the patient before surgery. The dashed line marks the spine. The solid line shows the tip of the scapula. B, Subscapular incision of 5 cm, 1 cm under the medial border of the scapula. C, The latissimus dorsi (∗) has been mobilized and preserved, and the tip of the scapula is retracted cephalad. The intercostal space is entered by separating the periosteum is separated from the superior border of the fifth rib (white arrows) without dividing any intercostal muscles. D, Reconstruction of the intercostal space. The periostium is sutured using a running suture to the rib.
Figure 2The position of the coarctation of the aorta in the chest. The solid line under the scapula shows the incision location.
Figure 3Neonatal ductus-dependent coarctation of the aorta with an elongated and hypoplastic distal arch (between the left common carotid and the left subclavian arteries), a stenotic isthmus, and a ductus arteriosus extending into the descending aorta.
Figure 4Clamping of the aortic arch between the brachiocephalic trunk and the common left carotid artery. The left subclavian and the left common carotid arteries are clamped by hand-held clips. The ductus arteriosus is ligated and divided. The coarctation is resected. The underside of the aortic arch is fileted open, and a counterincision is made in the opposing proximal descending aorta to allow an extended end-to-end anastomosis.
Figure 5The distal aortic arch and the proximal descending aorta are anastomosed with a running 7-0 or 6-0 polydioxanone suture.
Baseline patient characteristics
| Characteristic | Value |
|---|---|
| Sex, female/male, n | 15/16 |
| Age at operation, d, median (IQR) | 9 d (5-30, 1-447) |
| Weight at operation, median (IQR) | 3480 g (2900-3910 g, 980 g-10 kg) |
| Duct-dependency, n (%) | 25 (81) |
| Associated disease, n (%) | 30 (97) |
| Previous balloon angioplasty, n (%) | 3 (10) |
IQR, Interquartile range.
The coarctation was slightly dilated to reach a concomitant aortic valve stenosis to dilate the aortic valve. The surgical repair of the coarctation was performed within 2 weeks.
Operative data
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Operative time, min, median (IQR) | 90 (80-120) |
| Cross-clamp time, min, median (IQR) | 22 (20-29.25) |
| Procedure, n | |
| Extended end-to-end anastomosis | 31 |
| Pulmonary artery banding | 5 |
| Enlargement-plasty of the distal arch | 4 |
| Subclavian retrograde flap plasty | 1 |
IQR, Interquartile range.
Figure 6Kaplan–Meier estimates of freedom from reintervention up to 14 years.
Comparison of studies
| Study | Patients, n | Age at operation, y, mean ± SD | Follow-up, y, mean ± SD | Muscle-sparing PLT | Scapula alata, % | Scoliosis, % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Present study | 31 | 0.1 ± 0.2 | 11.2 ± 1.5 | Yes | 3.6 | 7.4 |
| Bal et al, 2003 | 49 CHD | 3.8 ± 4 | 6 | No | 77 | 31 (3/5 with CoA) |
| Emmel et al, 1996 | 21 CoA | <1 | ≥9 | No | 57.1 | NA |
| Roclawski et al, 2012 | 45 CoA | 6.9 | 14.8 | No | NA | 46.6 |
| Van Biezen et al, 1993 | 160 CoA | 12 | No | NA | 22 | |
| Kucukarslan et al, 2006 | 90 non-CHD | 4.2 ± 2.91 | 5.65 ± 2.83 | Yes (n = 40) | 12.5 (n = 5) | 2.5 (n = 1) |
SD, Standard deviation; PLT, posterolateral thoracotomy; CHD, congenital heart defect; CoA, coarctation of the aorta; NA, not available.
For the purpose of comparison, we used the average, although the median, as in Table 1, would be more appropriate in describing our cohort.
n/N = 1/28.
n/N = 2/27.