Hybrid aortic arch repair: 10-year experience from India.

Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg

Institute for Cardiac and Advanced Aortic Disorders (ICAAD), SRM Institute of Medical Sciences (SIMS Hospital), Vadapalani, Chennai, 600 026 India.

Published: June 2019

AI Article Synopsis

  • Hybrid aortic arch replacement (HAAR) is a growing safe treatment for aortic arch problems, divided into three groups based on the method of repair.
  • The study analyzed outcomes from 56 patients who underwent HAAR between 2007 and 2016, finding a high percentage of aortic dissections and aneurysms as primary conditions, with low rates of complications like strokes.
  • The results suggest that HAAR generally has good postoperative outcomes, with Type II hybrid procedures showing better results than Type I, and outcomes are improving as more experience is gained.

Article Abstract

Purpose: Hybrid aortic arch replacement (HAAR) is emerging as a safe treatment alternative for aortic arch pathologies. HAAR is divided into three groups. We have assessed our outcome for all three types of HAAR.

Method: From January 2007 to December 2016, we have performed 119 endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) of the aorta of which 56 were hybrid aortic arch repair. The hybrid repair entailed aortic arch vessel debranching and concomitant/delayed antegrade ± retrograde EVAR stent grafting of the arch. For group I and II hybrid patients, we debranch the supra-aortic arch vessels without the aid of circulatory arrest. EVAR was performed on the following day. In group III, hybrid antegrade EVAR of the thoracic aorta and arch reconstruction was performed in single stage.

Results: Of the 56 patients, 16 were in group I, 32 in group II, and 8 in group III. Mean age was 59.9 ± 9.4 years with 78.57% ( = 44) being males. Aortic dissection was the primary pathology in 31 (55.36%) patients followed by aneurysm in 24 (42.86%) patients. Marfans syndrome was present in 28.57% ( = 16) patients. Redosternotomy was performed in 10.71% patients ( = 6). Incidence of stroke was 5.38% ( = 3) and there was no patients with renal dysfunction requiring hemodialysis. There were two retrograde aortic dissections and two endoleaks, both in group I patients. Thirty days in-hospital mortality was 5.38% (2 in group I and 1 in group II).

Conclusion: Hybrid aortic arch replacement can be performed with good postoperative outcome. Type II hybrid is better than type I hybrid in our experience. As experience increases, the outcome continues to improve.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7525837PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12055-018-0689-0DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

aortic arch
24
hybrid aortic
16
group group
12
hybrid
9
arch
9
arch repair
8
aortic
8
arch replacement
8
group
8
patients
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!