Management of the left subclavian artery (SCA) during aortic arch surgery is associated with several challenges, including preserving distal perfusion, achieving hemostasis and preventing posterior circulation stroke and spinal cord injury. The most common challenge remains its deep position in the chest, often exacerbated by posterior and apical displacement from an arch aneurysm. We discuss several management options consisting of pre-, intra- and post-operative strategies and their respective advantages, disadvantages and clinical outcomes. A clinical algorithm is proposed to help guide decision-making in managing the difficult left SCA during aortic arch repair.

No abstract

No abstract

Objective Planned mitral repair strategies are generally established from preoperative echocardiography; however, specific details of the repair are often determined intraoperatively. We propose that three-dimensional printed, patient-specific, dynamic mitral valve models may help surgeons plan and trial all the details of a specific patient's mitral repair preoperatively. Methods Using preoperative echocardiography, segmentation, modeling software, and three-dimensional printing, we created dynamic, high-fidelity, patient-specific mitral valve models including the subvalvular apparatus. We assessed the accuracy of 10 patient mitral valve models anatomically and functionally in a heart phantom simulator, both objectively by blinded echocardiographic assessment, and subjectively by two mitral repair experts. After this, we attempted model mitral repair and compared the outcomes with postoperative echocardiography. Results Model measurements were accurate when compared with patients on anterior-posterior diameter, circumference, and anterior leaflet length; however, less accurate on posterior leaflet length. On subjective assessment, Likert scores were high at 3.8 ± 0.4 and 3.4 ± 0.7, suggesting good fidelity of the dynamic model echocardiogram and functional model in the phantom to the preoperative three-dimensional echocardiogram, respectively. Mitral repair was successful in all 10 models with significant reduction in mitral insufficiency. In two models, mitral repair was performed twice, using two different surgical techniques to assess which provided a better outcome. When compared with the actual patient mitral repair outcome, the repaired models compared favorably. Conclusions Complex mitral valve modeling seems to predict an individual patient's mitral anatomy well, before surgery. Further investigation is required to determine whether deliberate preoperative practice can improve mitral repair outcomes.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract