Innominate Versus Axillary Artery Cannulation for the Hemiarch Repair.

BACKGROUND: Innominate artery cannulation has gained some popularity over the last decade as an alternative to axillary artery cannulation for providing selective antegrade cerebral perfusion during repair of the ascending aorta and arch. Innominate artery cannulation provides several advantages including avoidance of an additional incision and use of a larger caliber artery to provide less resistance to high flow during bypass and selective antegrade cerebral perfusion. We hypothesize that these advantages make innominate artery cannulation superior to axillary artery cannulation as it can decrease operative times and potentially decrease blood loss.

METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective analysis of 206 patients who underwent hemiarch replacement between 2009 and 2017. All patients qualified including emergent cases. Groups were separated by mode of cannulation: axillary and innominate. Outcomes evaluated included cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time, cross-clamp time, circulatory arrest (CA) time, postoperative transfusions, intensive care unit length of stay, development of any neurological complications, end-organ failure, and mortality. Subgroup analysis was performed for elective and emergent cases.

RESULTS: Axillary and innominate artery cannulation accounted for 37% (n = 77) and 67% (n = 129) of cases, respectively. There was no difference in patient characteristics except for a higher incidence of renal disease in the axillary group (16% versus 6%, P = 0.05). More emergent cases were performed in the axillary group (61% versus 17%, P < 0.001). Innominate cases had shorter CPB times (189 versus 150 min, P < 0.001) and CA (22.5 versus 11 min, P < 0.001) times overall. In the elective subgroup, CA times were shorter for the innominate cases. However, the emergent subgroup displayed no difference in operative times. Less transfusions were given in the innominate group including units of red blood cells (2 [0-6] versus 0 [0-2], P < 0.001), units of platelets (2 [1-3] versus 1 [0-2], P = 0.001), and units of plasma (6 [2-9] versus 2 [0-4], P < 0.001). A similar trend was observed in the elective subgroup. No difference in transfusions was observed in the emergent subgroup. There was no statistical difference in remaining outcomes between cases of axillary and innominate cannulation in the combined, elective, and emergent groups.

CONCLUSIONS: Alternate cannulation strategies for open arch anastomoses are evolving with a trend toward using the innominate artery. These data suggest that innominate cannulation is at least equivalent to, and may be superior to, axillary cannulation. The innominate artery provides a larger conduit vessel for perfusion and this decrease in resistance to flow, allowing for faster cooling and rewarming, maybe why CPB times were lower in this group. Innominate cannulation is a safe and potentially advantageous technique for hemiarch repair.