Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Annals of Surgery (R...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Протезирование восходящей аорты по классической методике бентал-ла-де Боно ксеноперикардиальным кондуитом: отдаленные результаты

Протезирование восходящей аорты по классической методике бентал-ла-де Боно ксеноперикардиальным кондуитом: отдаленные результаты

Abstract

Цель. Анализ отдаленных результатов после имплантации ксеноперикардиальных кондуитов, содержащих разные типы протезов (биологический и механический), по классической методике Бенталла-Де Боно. Материал и методы. С января 1990 г. по декабрь 1999 г. из НЦССХ им. А.Н. Бакулева РАМН выписаны 130 пациентов после имплантации ксеноперикардиальных кондуитов по поводу аневризмы восходящей аорты. Из них биокондуит с биопротезом из той же ткани был имплантирован 25 (19,2%), с механическим протезом 105 (80,8%) больным. Результаты. В группе больных с биопротезом средний период наблюдения составил 10,66 ± 4,7 года (от 3 до 17 лет). Реоперированы 4 больных. Умерли 8 больных: в 2 случаях причиной смерти явилась острая аортальная недостаточность на фоне дисфункции биопротеза, 2 умерли после реоперации, и в 4 случаях смерть была вызвана некардиальными причинами. Выживаемость больных к 17-му году после операции в этой группе составила 28,6%, свобода от реоперации 65%, от тромбоэмболических осложнений 100%, от инфекционного эндокардита (ИЭ) 71,3%. По данным инструментальных исследований, к 15-му году наблюдения свобода от биодегенерации биопротеза составила 7%, к 17-му году свобода от биодегенерации стенки кондуита 54,82%. В группе больных с механическим протезом средний период наблюдения составил 10,1 + 3,7 года (от 1 года до 17 лет). Повторно оперированы 3 (3,6%). В поздние сроки умер 21 (25%) пациент: в 9 случаях причины не связаны с операцией и биокондуитом; к причинам смерти, связанным с ксенокондуитом и механическим протезом, относятся: протезный ИЭ у 3 пациентов, инфаркт миокарда у 2 (через 4 года и 11 лет), полиорганная недостаточность после реоперации у 1, острое нарушение мозгового кровообращения через 6 лет у 2, сердечная недостаточность у 3, фистула коронарного анастомоза у 1 пациента. Выживаемость в группе больных с механическим протезом к 10-му году после операции составила 77,8%, к 17-му году наблюдения она снизилась до 75,3% (с учетом реоперации), свобода от кальцификации и биодегенерации составила 49,22%, от реоперации 95,2%, от тромбоэмболических осложнений 96,4% и от ИЭ 93,1%. Заключение. Опыт использования ксеноперикардиального кондуита в хирургии аневризм восходящей аорты продемонстрировал хорошую выживаемость и низкую заболеваемость больных в отдаленном периоде.

Material and methods. 130 patients were discharged from Bakoulev SCCVS RAMS after xenopericardial conduit implantation for ascending aorta aneurysm between January 1990 and December 1999. Biological conduit with biological prosthesis of the same tissue was implanted in 25 patients (19.2%), mechanical prosthetic device was implanted in 105 patients (80.8%). Results. Duration of follow-up period in patients with biological prostheses was 10.66 ± 4.7 years (3-17 years). 4 patients underwent reoperation. 8 patients died, 2 of them had acute aortic insufficiency due to dysfunction of biological prosthesis, two other patients died after reoperation and in 4 mortality cases were associated with non-cardiac causes. By the 17 th year of follow-up period it was noted that survival after operation in this group was 28.6%, freedom from reoperation was 65%, freedom from thromboembolic complications was 100%, freedom from infective endocarditis (IE) was 71.3%. According to instrumental studies, freedom from biodegeneration of biological prosthesis was 7% by the 15 th year of follow-up and freedom from biodegeneration of conduit wall was 54.82% by the 17 th year. Mean follow-up in patients with mechanical prostheses was 10.1 ± 3.7 years (1-17 years). Reoperation was required in 3 cases. There were 21 deaths (25%) in a long-term period: in 9 cases the causes were not associated with operation and bioconduits. We noted the following predictors of mortality associated with xenoconduits and mechanical prostheses: prosthetic IE occurred in 3 patients, myocardial infarction in 2 patients (in 4 and 11 years), multiple organ failure after reoperation in 1 patient, acute cerebrovascular accident in 6 years in 2 patients, cardiac insufficiency in 3 patients, coronary anastomosis fistula in 1 patient. Survival in patients with mechanical prosthesis in 10 years after operation was 77.8% and in 17 years it reduced to 75.3% (together with reoperation), freedom from calcification and biodegradation was 49.22%, freedom from reoperation was 95.2%, freedom from thromboembolic complications was 96.4% and from IE 93.1%. Conclusion. The experience of using xenopericardial conduit in surgeries for ascending aorta aneurysms showed satisfactory survival and morbidity rates in a long-term period.

Keywords

АНЕВРИЗМА ВОСХОДЯЩЕЙ АОРТЫ, КСЕНОПЕРИКАРДИАЛЬНЫЕ КОНДУИТЫ, ОТДАЛЕННЫЕ РЕЗУЛЬТАТЫ, БИОДЕГЕНЕРАЦИЯ, РЕОПЕРАЦИЯ

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
gold