BackgroundThe widespread adoption of the frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique for total arch reconstruction (TAR) in aortic arch aneurysm and dissection has led to the development of numerous commercial single-piece FET devices, each with its own unique design features. One such device, Thoraflex™ Hybrid (Terumo Aortic, Glasgow, Scotland), has enjoyed widespread use since its introduction. We present and appraisal of its long-term clinical efficacy, based on international data.Materials and MethodsPre-, intra-, and postoperative data associated with Thoraflex™ Hybrid implantations for aortic arch dissection, aneurysm, and penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer (PAU) up to April 2019 was gathered and is presented herein. Follow-up data at discharge, 3-, 6-, 12-, 24-, 36-, 48-, 60-, 72-, and 84- months post-implantation are included.ResultsData associated with 931 cases of Thoraflex™ Hybrid implantation are included. Mean age at implantation was 63 ± 12 years. 55% of patients included were male. Aortic dissection accounted for 48% (n = 464) of cases. Mean cardiopulmonary bypass and circulatory arrest durations were 202 +72 and 69 ± 50 min, respectively. 30-day mortality was 0.6% (n = 6), while overall mortality was 14 (1.5%). Freedom from adverse events at 84 months was 95% (n = 869). Postoperative complications included neurological deficit, multi-organ failure, cardiorespiratory compromise, and infection.DiscussionThoraflex™ Hybrid's unique design is advantageous in comparison to market alternatives. Our data is consistent with that reported in literature and suggests Thoraflex™ Hybrid is associated with favourable rates of mortality and morbidity.ConclusionThoraflex™ Hybrid remains a central player in the aortic arch prosthesis market. Its use it widespread and is associated with favourable design features and clinical outcomes relative to market alternatives.
Evidence suggests that preoperative IABP may have a beneficial effect on mortality and morbidity in specific high risk patient groups undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting, however there are many problems with the quality, validity and generalisability of the trials. However, the available evidence is not robust enough to extend the use of IABP to truly elective, high risk patients. Defining more precisely which patient groups may benefit would be the challenge for the future.
This meta-analysis shows that mitral valve repair has good clinical outcomes both in-hospital and at 1 and 5 years of follow-up. Mitral valve repair should be attempted in those patients in whom sufficient valve tissue is present for reconstruction after all infectious tissue has been resected.
Objective: The innominate artery is considered an alternative site for establishing cardiopulmonary bypass in surgical procedures involving the thoracic aorta. This systematic review examines the use of innominate artery cannulation in aortic surgery.Methods: A systematic literature search was undertaken among the four major databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Ovid) to identify all studies that utilized innominate artery cannulation for establishing cardiopulmonary bypass and providing cerebral perfusion in thoracic aortic surgery. The data were reviewed up to September 2018.Results: Acute type A aortic dissection contributed to 36% (n = 818) of the total 2,290 patients. 31.5% (n = 719) underwent surgery on the aortic root only; 54.5% (n = 1246) had ascending and hemi-arch replacement, while 11.5% had total aortic arch replacement and 2.5% had a frozen elephant trunk inserted. Postoperative stroke rate was 1.25% (n = 28), temporary neurological deficit was 4.8% (n = 111). All-cause 30-day mortality rate was 2.7% (n = 61).Conclusion: Innominate artery cannulation is a safe technique in patients who undergo thoracic aortic surgery. It can be utilized, in selected cases, as a reliable route for establishing cardiopulmonary bypass and maintaining cerebral perfusion. K E Y W O R D S aorta, aortic surgery, cannulation, innominate artery
BackgroundThoracic aortic disease has a high mortality. We sought to establish the contribution of unwarranted variation in care to regional differences in outcomes observed in patients with thoracic aortic disease in England.Methods and ResultsData from the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) and the National Adult Cardiac Surgery Audit (NACSA) were extracted. A parallel systematic review/meta‐analysis through December 2015, and structure and process questionnaire of English cardiac surgery units were also accomplished. Treatment and mortality rates were investigated. A total of 24 548 adult patients in the HES study, 8058 in the NACSA study, and 103 543 from a total of 33 studies in the systematic review were obtained. Treatment rates for thoracic aortic disease within 6 months of index admission ranged from 7.6% to 31.5% between English counties. Risk‐adjusted 6‐month mortality in untreated patients ranged from 19.4% to 36.3%. Regional variation persisted after adjustment for disease or patient factors. Regional cardiac units with higher case volumes treated more‐complex patients and had significantly lower risk‐adjusted mortality relative to low‐volume units. The results of the systematic review indicated that the delivery of care by multidisciplinary teams in high‐volume units resulted in better outcomes. The observational analyses and the online survey indicated that this is not how services are configured in most units in England.ConclusionsChanges in the organization of services that address unwarranted variation in the provision of care for patients with thoracic aortic disease in England may result in more‐equitable access to treatment and improved outcomes.
Background and Aim of the Study The frozen elephant trunk (FET) procedure became a popular entity for utilization in aortic arch aneurysm disease. However, its proper mortality and morbidities as well as the predictors of outcomes are poorly identified. This systematic review and meta‐analysis explore FET outcomes and its predictors with a focus on zone aortic proximalization. Methods We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus databases from their beginning to June 2020 to find studies reporting the outcomes of the FET procedure for the total arch replacement (TAR). Results A total of 64 studies including 7967 patients were evaluated. The pooled estimates of cerebrovascular accidents, paraplegia, renal failure, and in‐hospital mortality were 7.104 (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.691–8.661; I2 = 78.53%), 3.465 (95% CI, 2.852–4.136; I2 = 15.96), 14.969 (95% CI, 11.361–18.977; I2 = 91.26%), and 8.933 (95% CI, 7.128–10.919; I2 = 78.51%), respectively. Stratification by the geographical locations and by the aortic pathologies led to lower heterogeneity, but not for renal failure. The distal anastomosis in Zone 2 was associated with a lower rate of renal failure compared with Zone 3 (odds ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.36–0.81; p = .003; I2 = 0%). Conclusions The FET procedure for TAR can be performed with acceptable mortality and morbidities among patients with complex aortic pathologies. Moreover, the distal anastomosis in Zone 2 was associated with lower renal failure compared to Zone 3.
Cardiovascular surgeons have long debated the safe duration of deep hypothermic circulatory arrest during thoracic aortic aneurysm surgery. The rationale for using adjunctive cerebral perfusion (or not) is to achieve the best technical aortic repair with the lowest risk of morbidity and death. In this literature review, we highlight the debates surrounding these issues, evaluate the disparate findings on deep hypothermic circulatory arrest durations and temperatures, and consider the usefulness of adjunctive perfusion.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.