Outcomes of Deep Hypothermic Circulatory Arrest for Descending and Thoracoabdominal Aneurysm Repair

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE Annals of vascular surgery Pub Date : 2024-08-07 DOI:10.1016/j.avsg.2024.07.096
{"title":"Outcomes of Deep Hypothermic Circulatory Arrest for Descending and Thoracoabdominal Aneurysm Repair","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.avsg.2024.07.096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Deep hypothermic circulatory arrest (DHCA) in patients undergoing descending thoracic (DTAA) or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. We present our outcomes after open DTAA and TAAA repair with and without DHCA.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>From 1999 to 2022, 81 (38.8%) patients undergoing DTAA or TAAA repair required DHCA because proximal cross-clamping was not feasible or aneurysmal pathology extended into the arch and 128 (61.2%) patients required only distal bypass. Because of intrinsic pathological differences in patients requiring DHCA, confidence intervals (CIs) were used to compare groups in lieu of formal hypothesis tests.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>DHCA patients had more chronic dissections (64.2% vs. 43.8%, 95% CI for difference: 6–35%) and higher body mass indices (29.5 ± 6.8 vs. 27.2 ± 6.6, CI: 26–421%). More non-DHCA patients had medial degeneration (9.9% vs. 31.3%, CI: −33 to −7%). There were 10 (12.4%) in-hospital deaths for the DHCA and 10 (7.8%) for the non-DHCA group (CI: −5 to 14%). Survival at 10 years was 52.6% (CI: 42.1–65.7%) for the non-DHCA group and 48.3% (CI: 40.3–57.9%) for the DHCA group. The only meaningful differences in postoperative outcomes were intensive care unit (5.5 days vs. 6 days, CI: 12–410%) and hospital stay (19 days vs. 12 days, CI: 74–470%), which were longer in the DHCA group.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Despite longer intensive care unit and hospital length of stays, selective use of DHCA is safe and effective with comparable morbidity and mortality to non-DHCA in open DTAA and TAAA repair.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8061,"journal":{"name":"Annals of vascular surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of vascular surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S089050962400493X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Deep hypothermic circulatory arrest (DHCA) in patients undergoing descending thoracic (DTAA) or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. We present our outcomes after open DTAA and TAAA repair with and without DHCA.

Methods

From 1999 to 2022, 81 (38.8%) patients undergoing DTAA or TAAA repair required DHCA because proximal cross-clamping was not feasible or aneurysmal pathology extended into the arch and 128 (61.2%) patients required only distal bypass. Because of intrinsic pathological differences in patients requiring DHCA, confidence intervals (CIs) were used to compare groups in lieu of formal hypothesis tests.

Results

DHCA patients had more chronic dissections (64.2% vs. 43.8%, 95% CI for difference: 6–35%) and higher body mass indices (29.5 ± 6.8 vs. 27.2 ± 6.6, CI: 26–421%). More non-DHCA patients had medial degeneration (9.9% vs. 31.3%, CI: −33 to −7%). There were 10 (12.4%) in-hospital deaths for the DHCA and 10 (7.8%) for the non-DHCA group (CI: −5 to 14%). Survival at 10 years was 52.6% (CI: 42.1–65.7%) for the non-DHCA group and 48.3% (CI: 40.3–57.9%) for the DHCA group. The only meaningful differences in postoperative outcomes were intensive care unit (5.5 days vs. 6 days, CI: 12–410%) and hospital stay (19 days vs. 12 days, CI: 74–470%), which were longer in the DHCA group.

Conclusions

Despite longer intensive care unit and hospital length of stays, selective use of DHCA is safe and effective with comparable morbidity and mortality to non-DHCA in open DTAA and TAAA repair.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
降温和胸腹动脉瘤修复术中深低温循环休克的疗效。
目的:在接受降主动脉瘤(DTAA)或胸腹主动脉瘤(TAAA)修复术的患者中,深低温循环停止(DHCA)与发病率和死亡率增加有关。我们介绍了采用或不采用 DHCA 的开放式 DTAA 和 TAAA 修复术的结果:从1999年到2022年,81例(38.8%)接受DTAA或TAAA修复术的患者由于近端交叉夹闭不可行或动脉瘤病理延伸至动脉弓而需要DHCA,128例(61.2%)患者仅需要远端搭桥。由于需要DHCA的患者存在内在病理差异,因此使用置信区间来比较各组,而不是进行正式的假设检验:DHCA患者有更多的慢性动脉夹层(64.2% vs 43.8%,95% CI差异:6% - 35%)和更高的体重指数(29.5 ± 6.8 vs 27.2 ± 6.6,CI:26% - 421%)。更多的非 DHCA 患者出现内侧退变(9.9% vs 31.3%,CI:-33% --7%)。DHCA组有10人(12.4%)在院内死亡,非DHCA组有10人(7.8%)在院内死亡(CI:-5% - 14%)。非 DHCA 组 10 年生存率为 52.6%(CI:42.1%-65.7%),DHCA 组为 48.3%(CI:40.3%-57.9%)。术后结果中唯一有意义的差异是ICU(5.5天 vs 6天,CI:12%-410%)和住院时间(19天 vs 12天,CI:74%-470%),DHCA组的住院时间更长:尽管重症监护室和住院时间较长,但在开放式 DTAA 和 TAAA 修复术中选择性使用 DHCA 是安全有效的,其发病率和死亡率与非 DHCA 相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
13.30%
发文量
603
审稿时长
50 days
期刊介绍: Annals of Vascular Surgery, published eight times a year, invites original manuscripts reporting clinical and experimental work in vascular surgery for peer review. Articles may be submitted for the following sections of the journal: Clinical Research (reports of clinical series, new drug or medical device trials) Basic Science Research (new investigations, experimental work) Case Reports (reports on a limited series of patients) General Reviews (scholarly review of the existing literature on a relevant topic) Developments in Endovascular and Endoscopic Surgery Selected Techniques (technical maneuvers) Historical Notes (interesting vignettes from the early days of vascular surgery) Editorials/Correspondence
期刊最新文献
Table of Contents On The Cover Table of Contents On The Cover Aortic Outcome after Implementation of a Treatment Strategy for Type B Aortic Dissection Involving the Aortic Arch.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1