We have located links that may give you full text access.
Aortic remodeling after hybrid provisional extension to induce complete attachment aortic repair of chronic residual type I aortic dissection.
Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery 2019 October
OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to examine the role of the provisional extension to induce complete attachment (PETTICOAT) aortic dissection repair technique with bare metal stents (BMSs) in abdominal remodeling of residual DeBakey type I aortic dissection.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients with chronic aneurysm formation and residual DeBakey type I aortic dissection (ie, original acute aortic dissection DeBakey type I after primary surgical open repair) who underwent arch reoperation with frozen elephant trunk replacement or endovascular debranching with or without an abdominal BMS between December 2006 and December 2016. We analyzed diameters and volumes in 3 dimensions for the true and false lumens of the thoracic and abdominal aorta as well as the thrombosis percentage of the false lumen between the non-BMS (non-PETTICOAT) and BMS (PETTICOAT) groups.
RESULTS: Forty-seven patients who had completed at least 1 year of follow-up were included. The non-BMS (without abdominal BMS) and BMS groups had significant differences in abdominal true lumen diameter and volumetric change at the first postoperative examination and at the examination 1 year after surgery (26.8 mL, median [19.4-34.1 mL, interquartile range (IQR)]) in non-BMS vs 42.5 mL, median [31.1-57.9 mL, IQR]) in BMS (postoperative survey [F test, 33.775; P = .000]) and (30.1 mL, median [20.5-34.1 mL, IQR] in non-BMS vs 46.6 mL, median [31.3-57.4 mL, IQR]) in BMS (12-month survey [F test, 14.001; P = .001]). The abdominal false lumen thrombosis percentage was higher in the BMS group than in the non-BMS group (25.6%, median [16.4%-58.9%, IQR] in non-BMS vs 54.0%, median [36.7%-65.3%, IQR] in the BMS group (F test, 6.318; P = .016).
CONCLUSIONS: Following reintervention for chronic residual DeBakey type I aortic dissection, PETTICOAT abdominal dissection BMS effectively expanded the thoracic and abdominal true lumen and augmented false lumen thrombosis percentage during the first postoperative year.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients with chronic aneurysm formation and residual DeBakey type I aortic dissection (ie, original acute aortic dissection DeBakey type I after primary surgical open repair) who underwent arch reoperation with frozen elephant trunk replacement or endovascular debranching with or without an abdominal BMS between December 2006 and December 2016. We analyzed diameters and volumes in 3 dimensions for the true and false lumens of the thoracic and abdominal aorta as well as the thrombosis percentage of the false lumen between the non-BMS (non-PETTICOAT) and BMS (PETTICOAT) groups.
RESULTS: Forty-seven patients who had completed at least 1 year of follow-up were included. The non-BMS (without abdominal BMS) and BMS groups had significant differences in abdominal true lumen diameter and volumetric change at the first postoperative examination and at the examination 1 year after surgery (26.8 mL, median [19.4-34.1 mL, interquartile range (IQR)]) in non-BMS vs 42.5 mL, median [31.1-57.9 mL, IQR]) in BMS (postoperative survey [F test, 33.775; P = .000]) and (30.1 mL, median [20.5-34.1 mL, IQR] in non-BMS vs 46.6 mL, median [31.3-57.4 mL, IQR]) in BMS (12-month survey [F test, 14.001; P = .001]). The abdominal false lumen thrombosis percentage was higher in the BMS group than in the non-BMS group (25.6%, median [16.4%-58.9%, IQR] in non-BMS vs 54.0%, median [36.7%-65.3%, IQR] in the BMS group (F test, 6.318; P = .016).
CONCLUSIONS: Following reintervention for chronic residual DeBakey type I aortic dissection, PETTICOAT abdominal dissection BMS effectively expanded the thoracic and abdominal true lumen and augmented false lumen thrombosis percentage during the first postoperative year.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app