• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.39 no.2 s.259
• /
• pp.99-105
• /
• 2006

Background: Interrupted aortic arch is a rare congenital heart anomaly which still shows high surgical mortality. In this study, we investigated the causes of and the risk factors for mortality to improve the surgical outcomes for this difficult disease entity. Material and Method: From 1984 to 2004, 42 patients diagnosed as IAA were reviewed retrospectively. Age, body weight at operation, preoperative diagnosis, preoperative PGE1 requirement, type of interrupted aortic arch, degree of left ventricular outflow stenosis, CPB time, and ACC time were the possible risk factors for mortality. Result: There were .14 hospital deaths. Preoperative use of PGE1, need for circulartory assist and aortic cross clamp time proved to be positive risk factors for mortality on univariate analysis. Preoperative left ventricular outflow stenosis was considered a risk factor for mortality but it did not show statistical significance (p-value=0.61). Causes of death included hypoxia due to pulmonary banding, left ventricular outtract stenosis, infection, mitral valve regurgitation, long cardiopulmonary bypass time and failure of coronary transfer failure in TGA patients. Conclusion: In this study, we demonstrated that surgical mortality is still high due to the risk factors including preoperative status and long operative time. However preoperative subaortic dimension was not related statistically to operative death statistically. Adequate preoperative management and short operation time are mandatory for better survival outcome.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.34 no.12
• /
• pp.901-908
• /
• 2001

Background : Coronary artery bypass graft(CABG) in patients with advanced left ventricular dysfunction has often been regarded as having high mortality rate, despite the great improvement in operative result of CABG. With recent advances in surgical technique and myocardial protection, surgical revascularization improved the symptom and long-term survival of these high risk patients more than the medical conservative treatment. Material and Methold : Clinical data of 31(4.1％) patients with preoperative ejection fraction less than 30% among 864 CABGs performed between January 1995 and March 1999 were retrospectively analyzed and pre- and postoperative changes of the ejection fraction on echocardiography were analyzed. There were 26 men and 5 women. The mean age was 60.7 years(range 41 to 72 years). History of myocardial infarction(30 cases, 98％) was the most common preoperative risk factor. There were seven irreversible myocardial infarction on thallium scan. Most patients had triple vessel diseases(26 cases, 84％) and first degree of Rentrop classification(16 cases, 52％) on coronary angiography. The mean number of distal anastomosis during CABG was per patient was 4.9${\pm}$0.8 sites in each patient. In addition to long saphenous veins, the internal mammary artery was used in 20 patients. Total bypass time was 244.7${\pm}$3.7 minutes(range, 117 to 567 minutes), and mean aortic cross-clamp time was 77.9 ${\pm}$ 1.6 minutes(range, 30 to 178 minutes). There were five other reparative procedures such as two left ventricular aneurysrmectomy, two mitral repair, and one aortic valve replacement. There were twelve postoperative complications such as three cardiac arrhythmia, two bleeding(re-operation), one delayed sternal closure, eleven usage of intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation for low cardiac output. Two patients died, postoperative mortality was 6.5% . Twenty-nine patients were relieved of chest pain and left ventricular ejection fraction after operation was significantly higher(38.5${\pm}$11.6%, p 0.001) as compared with preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction(25.3${\pm}$2.3%). The follow up period of out patient was 25. 3 months. Conclusion: In patients with coronary artery disease and advanced left ventricular dysfunction, coronary artery bypass grafting can be performed relatively safely with improvement in left ventricular function, but it will be necessary to study long term results.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.41 no.5
• /
• pp.598-604
• /
• 2008

Background: The improvements in endoscopic equipment and surgical robots has encouraged the performance of minimally invasive cardiac operations. Yet only a few Korean studies have compared this procedure with the sternotomy approach. Material and Method: Between December 2005 and July 2007, 48 patients (group A) underwent minimally invasive cardiac surgery with AESOP through a small right thoracotomy. During the same period, 50 patients (group B) underwent conventional surgery. We compared the operative time, the operative results, the post-operative pain and the recovery of both groups. Result: There was no hospital mortality and there were no significant differences in the incidence of operative complications between the two groups. The operative $(292.7{\pm}61.7\;and\;264.0{\pm}47.9min$, respectively; p=0.01) and CPB times ($128.4{\pm}37.6\;and\;101.7{\pm}32.5min$, respectively; <0.01) were longer for group A, whereas there was no difference between the aortic cross clamp times ($82.1{\pm}35.0\;and\;87.8{\pm}113.5min$, respectively; p=0.74) and ventilator times ($18.0{\pm}18.4\;and\;19.7{\pm}9.7$ hr, respectively; p=0.57) between the groups. The stay on the ICU $(53.2{\pm}40.2\;and\;72.8{\pm}42.1hr$, respectively; p=0.02) and the hospitalization time ($9.7{\pm}7.2\;and\;14.8{\pm}11.9days$, respectively; p=0.01) were shorter for group A. The Patients in group B had more transfusions, but the difference was not significant. For the overall operative intervals, which ranged from one to four weeks, the pair score was significantly lower for the patients of group A than for the patients of group B. In terms of the postoperative activities, which were measured by the Duke Activity Scale questionnaire, the functional status score was clearly higher for group A compared to group B. The analysis showed no difference in the severity of either post-repair of mitral ($0.7{\pm}1.0\;and\;0.9{\pm}0.9$, respectively; p=0.60) and tricuspid regurgitation ($1.0{\pm}0.9\;and\;1.1{\pm}1.0$, respectively; p=0.89). In both groups, there were no valve related complications, except for one patient with paravalvular leakage in each group. Conclusion: These results show that compared with the median sternotomy patients, the patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery enjoyed significant postoperative advantages such as less pain, a more rapid return to full activity, improved cosmetics and a reduced hospital stay. The minimally invasive surgery can be done with similar clinical safety compared to the conventional surgery that's done through a median sternotomy.