Single stage repair for aortic root aneurysm in a patient with coexisting coarctation incorporating the Cabrol technique: a case report

Abstract

BackgroundA 44 year old man who presented with a history of chest pain and dyspnoea was found to have an aneurysm of the aortic root, aortic valve insufficiency, and coarctation of the aorta.Case presentationThe patient underwent a single stage procedure to treat the aortic root, valve and coarctation with a composite valved conduit and extra-anatomic bypass of the coarctation. The modified Cabrol technique was necessary to attach the coronary buttons due to grossly abnormal anatomy. The patient made a remarkable recovery and was discharged on the 8th post-operative day.ConclusionThis case report highlights the feasibility and efficacy of performing a single stage procedure on complex coarctation with associated cardiac defects. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of the modified Cabrol technique being used in this particular setting.

One-stage repair of aortic coarctation and cardiac pathology via sternotomy

“…If a median sternotomy is used, it is easier to perform an ascending-to-descending aortic bypass rather than CoA surgical repair. 11 The most frequent complication of extraanatomical bypass is prosthetic deformation, although it has been noted that kinking can be avoided if the prosthesis is laid along the left border of the heart. 17 In this study, multislice computed tomography revealed a huge thrombosis (6.5 сm) in a patient in the first group, extending from the CoA zone to the descending aorta.…”

“…Recently, there has been an increase in the number of reports of single-stage procedures for CoA correction with ascending aortic aneurysm repair. 11 Single-stage procedures can be performed using either surgical or transcatheter CoA correction. 12 While transcatheter treatment provides better results in terms of short-term postoperative complications, there is a higher rate of restenosis in the medium term, requiring a second intervention (11% vs.…”