• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.36 no.5
• /
• pp.335-342
• /
• 2003

Background: The aortic arch replacement in an acute aortic dissection is technically demanding procedure that has a lot of postoperative morbidity and high mortality The authors have applied several techniques of aortic arch replacement to overcome the risks of the procedure. Therefore we analysed the results of these techniques. Material and Method: From March of 1996 to July of 2002, we performed 31 cases of the aortic arch replacement in the Stanford type A acute aortic dissection. There were 12 male and 19 female patient's with 59.6$\pm$9.4 years of mean age. Among them 18 cases were treated with the hemiarch replacement and 13 cases with the total arch replacement. We approached the aortic arch through median sternotomy in all but 3 cases of Clamshell incision and applied the deep hypothermic circulatory arrest with retrograde cerebral perfusion. The associated procedures were 2 Bentall's procedures, an axillobifemoral bypass, a femorofemoral bypass and a carotid artery bypass. Result: The postoperative morbidities were 8 acute renal failures, 3 CNS complications, 2 low cardiac output syndromes, 2 malpefusion syndromes, and 2 deep wound infections. There were 4 cases of early hospital mortality which were from an acute renal failure a postoperative bleeding, a low cardiac output syndrome, and a reperfusion syndrome. There were 3 cases of late hospital mortality which were from an acute renal failure, and 2 multiorgan failures. So the total mortality rate was 22.5%. There were 4 cases of late mortality after the discharge, which were form 2 cases of distal anastomotic rupture and 2 cases of intracranial hemorrhage. Conclusion: The hemiarch replacement has relatively shorter operative time and lower hospital mortality but higher late mortality than the total arch replacement. The total arch replacement needs more technically demanding procedure.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.36 no.5
• /
• pp.343-347
• /
• 2003

Background: The femoral artery is the most common site of canuulation for cardiopulmonary bypass in surgery for type A aortic dissection. Recently, many surgeons prefer the axillary artery to the femoral artery as the arterial cannulation site for several benefits. We evaluated the safety and usefulness of axillary artery cannulation in surgery for acute type A aortic dissection. Material and Method: Between Oct. 1995 and Sep. 2001, 71 patients underwent operations for acute type A aortic dissection. The arterial cannula was inserted into the axillary artery in 31 patients (AXILLARY group, mean age=56), and into the femoral artery in 40 patients (FEMORAL group, mean age=57). We retrospectively compared the incidence of mortality, morbidities, and hospital course. Result: The mean duration of cardiopulmonary bypass and circulatory arrest were significantly shorier in the AXILLARY group (207 min and 39min, respectively) than in the FEMORAL group (263min and 49 min, respectively; P<0.05). Postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the AXILLARY group than in the FEMORAL group (mean 15 days vs. 35 days, p<0.05). Although there was no difference in the incidence of new-onset permanent neurological dysfunction (3.2%, in the AXILLARY group, 2.5% in the FEMORAL group), the incidence of transient neurological dysfunction was significantly lower in the AXILLARY group (12.9% vs. 25%, p<0.05). In the FEMORAL group, two patients needed urgent conversion to cannulation site due to arch vessel malperfusion. In the AXILLARY group, there was only one patient who had a complication related to the cannulation, i.e., median nerve injury. Conclusion: Axillary artery cannulation was safe and helpful in decreasing the cerebral ischemic time and incidence of transient neuroligcal dysfunction in surgery for acute type A aortic dissection, It enabled us to approach the patients with aortic arch pathology more aggressively.