急性A型主动脉夹层合并冠状动脉灌注不良手术中隐静脉移植物的瞬时血流测量

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q4 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Annals of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Pub Date : 2022-04-05 DOI:10.5761/atcs.oa.21-00255
Naoshi Minamidate, Noriyuki Takashima, Takeshi Kinoshita, Tomoaki Suzuki
{"title":"急性A型主动脉夹层合并冠状动脉灌注不良手术中隐静脉移植物的瞬时血流测量","authors":"Naoshi Minamidate, Noriyuki Takashima, Takeshi Kinoshita, Tomoaki Suzuki","doi":"10.5761/atcs.oa.21-00255","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Transit-time flow measurement (TTFM), consisting of pulsatility index (PI), mean graft flow, and diastolic filling, is mainly used as a bypass assessment for coronary artery disease (CAD). However, little was known about TTFM in the case of coronary malperfusion (CMP). This study aimed to clarify the difference in the results of TTFM between two different diseases. Methods: Between 2010 and 2020, 138 patients underwent aortic surgery and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with vein grafts. Patients were divided into two groups: CMP (n = 26) and CAD (n = 27). Their results were compared. The primary endpoints were the results of TTFM. Secondary endpoints were the relation between TTFM and mortality, morbidity, and short-term patency in each group. Results: The PI in the CMP group was significantly higher than the other group (4.7 ± 2.9 vs. 3.4 ± 1.9, p = 0.04). There was no statistical significance in the other two elements. In both groups, the short-term graft patency, mortality, and morbidity but for cardiac tamponade did not significantly change depending on the TTFM results. Conclusions: Patients with CMP tended to have a higher PI than those with CAD. With additional CABG for aortic dissection, insufficient TTFM results did not necessarily mean poor short-term graft patency, complications, or case mortality.","PeriodicalId":8037,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery","volume":"28 1","pages":"271 - 277"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Transit-Time Flow Measurement of Saphenous Vein Graft Used for Surgery of Acute Type A Aortic Dissection with Coronary Malperfusion\",\"authors\":\"Naoshi Minamidate, Noriyuki Takashima, Takeshi Kinoshita, Tomoaki Suzuki\",\"doi\":\"10.5761/atcs.oa.21-00255\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: Transit-time flow measurement (TTFM), consisting of pulsatility index (PI), mean graft flow, and diastolic filling, is mainly used as a bypass assessment for coronary artery disease (CAD). However, little was known about TTFM in the case of coronary malperfusion (CMP). This study aimed to clarify the difference in the results of TTFM between two different diseases. Methods: Between 2010 and 2020, 138 patients underwent aortic surgery and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with vein grafts. Patients were divided into two groups: CMP (n = 26) and CAD (n = 27). Their results were compared. The primary endpoints were the results of TTFM. Secondary endpoints were the relation between TTFM and mortality, morbidity, and short-term patency in each group. Results: The PI in the CMP group was significantly higher than the other group (4.7 ± 2.9 vs. 3.4 ± 1.9, p = 0.04). There was no statistical significance in the other two elements. In both groups, the short-term graft patency, mortality, and morbidity but for cardiac tamponade did not significantly change depending on the TTFM results. Conclusions: Patients with CMP tended to have a higher PI than those with CAD. With additional CABG for aortic dissection, insufficient TTFM results did not necessarily mean poor short-term graft patency, complications, or case mortality.\",\"PeriodicalId\":8037,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"271 - 277\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5761/atcs.oa.21-00255\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5761/atcs.oa.21-00255","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:瞬时血流测量(TTFM)由脉搏指数(PI)、平均移植物流量和舒张充血组成,主要用于冠状动脉疾病(CAD)的旁路评估。然而,对冠状动脉灌注不良(CMP)的TTFM知之甚少。本研究旨在阐明两种不同疾病之间TTFM结果的差异。方法:2010年至2020年,138例患者接受了主动脉手术和冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)。患者分为两组:CMP (n = 26)和CAD (n = 27)。比较了他们的结果。主要终点是TTFM的结果。次要终点是各组TTFM与死亡率、发病率和短期通畅的关系。结果:CMP组PI明显高于对照组(4.7±2.9比3.4±1.9,p = 0.04)。其他两项差异无统计学意义。在两组中,除了心脏填塞外,短期移植物通畅、死亡率和发病率均未因TTFM结果而发生显著变化。结论:CMP患者PI高于CAD患者。对于主动脉夹层的额外冠脉搭桥,不充分的TTFM结果并不一定意味着短期移植物通畅不良、并发症或病例死亡率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Transit-Time Flow Measurement of Saphenous Vein Graft Used for Surgery of Acute Type A Aortic Dissection with Coronary Malperfusion
Purpose: Transit-time flow measurement (TTFM), consisting of pulsatility index (PI), mean graft flow, and diastolic filling, is mainly used as a bypass assessment for coronary artery disease (CAD). However, little was known about TTFM in the case of coronary malperfusion (CMP). This study aimed to clarify the difference in the results of TTFM between two different diseases. Methods: Between 2010 and 2020, 138 patients underwent aortic surgery and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with vein grafts. Patients were divided into two groups: CMP (n = 26) and CAD (n = 27). Their results were compared. The primary endpoints were the results of TTFM. Secondary endpoints were the relation between TTFM and mortality, morbidity, and short-term patency in each group. Results: The PI in the CMP group was significantly higher than the other group (4.7 ± 2.9 vs. 3.4 ± 1.9, p = 0.04). There was no statistical significance in the other two elements. In both groups, the short-term graft patency, mortality, and morbidity but for cardiac tamponade did not significantly change depending on the TTFM results. Conclusions: Patients with CMP tended to have a higher PI than those with CAD. With additional CABG for aortic dissection, insufficient TTFM results did not necessarily mean poor short-term graft patency, complications, or case mortality.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Annals of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-SURGERY
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
56
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Information not localized
期刊最新文献
Arterial Embolization and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography-Guided Lung Resection for Anomalous Systemic Arterial Blood Supply to Normal Lung: Two Case Reports. Surgery for Ascending Aortic Aneurysm and Aortic Valve Insufficiency in Conditions of Active Proceeding Syphilitic Aortitis and Valvulitis. Impact of Graft Velocity on Saphenous Vein Graft Atherosclerosis after Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting. Surgery for Secondary Spontaneous Pneumothorax with Chronic Lung Diseases. Impact of Impella Support on Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Postcardiotomy Cardiogenic Shock.
×
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