We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Outcomes of VasoRing Connector in Patients With Acute Type A Aortic Dissection.
Annals of Thoracic Surgery 2018 September
BACKGROUND: Outcomes of acute type A aortic dissection repair may be improved when VasoRing connectors (VRC [Sunwei Technology, Taipei, Taiwan]) are used to facilitate aortic anastomosis. In the present study, we compared the results of acute type A aortic dissection repair using VRC and conventional suture technique.
METHODS: A total of 68 patients who underwent acute type A aortic dissection repair by total arch replacement and antegrade frozen elephant trunk procedure at our institution were enrolled. Records of patients receiving aorta anastomosis with VRC (n = 33) and conventional suture (n = 35) were retrospectively compared. All the surgical results were collected and analyzed.
RESULTS: The results showed that the VRC group exhibited significance in total operative time (326 ± 80 minutes versus 362 ± 34 minutes, p = 0.023), cardiopulmonary bypass time (97 ± 10 minutes versus 134 ± 15 minutes, p < 0.001), aortic cross-clamp time (97 ± 10 minutes versus 134 ± 15 minutes, p < 0.001), and circulatory arrest time (15 ± 4 minutes versus 50 ± 8 minutes, p < 0.001) compared with the suture group. Use of VRC for aortic anastomosis led to significantly less perioperative blood loss (442 ± 75 mL versus 849 ± 419 mL, p < 0.001) compared with conventional suture for aortic anastomosis There was no reoperation for postoperative bleeding in the VRC group whereas reoperation for postoperative bleeding occurred in 20% of the suture group (0% versus 20%, p = 0.011). Postoperative blood loss, amount of blood transfusion, and acute kidney injury requiring hemodialysis were also significantly less in the VRC group than the suture group.
CONCLUSIONS: Use of VRC shortened operative time and improved bleeding control incorporating standard methods for aortic anastomoses during acute type A aortic dissection repair by total arch replacement and antegrade frozen elephant trunk procedure. Long-term follow-up and randomized comparison are needed to confirm VRC efficacy.
METHODS: A total of 68 patients who underwent acute type A aortic dissection repair by total arch replacement and antegrade frozen elephant trunk procedure at our institution were enrolled. Records of patients receiving aorta anastomosis with VRC (n = 33) and conventional suture (n = 35) were retrospectively compared. All the surgical results were collected and analyzed.
RESULTS: The results showed that the VRC group exhibited significance in total operative time (326 ± 80 minutes versus 362 ± 34 minutes, p = 0.023), cardiopulmonary bypass time (97 ± 10 minutes versus 134 ± 15 minutes, p < 0.001), aortic cross-clamp time (97 ± 10 minutes versus 134 ± 15 minutes, p < 0.001), and circulatory arrest time (15 ± 4 minutes versus 50 ± 8 minutes, p < 0.001) compared with the suture group. Use of VRC for aortic anastomosis led to significantly less perioperative blood loss (442 ± 75 mL versus 849 ± 419 mL, p < 0.001) compared with conventional suture for aortic anastomosis There was no reoperation for postoperative bleeding in the VRC group whereas reoperation for postoperative bleeding occurred in 20% of the suture group (0% versus 20%, p = 0.011). Postoperative blood loss, amount of blood transfusion, and acute kidney injury requiring hemodialysis were also significantly less in the VRC group than the suture group.
CONCLUSIONS: Use of VRC shortened operative time and improved bleeding control incorporating standard methods for aortic anastomoses during acute type A aortic dissection repair by total arch replacement and antegrade frozen elephant trunk procedure. Long-term follow-up and randomized comparison are needed to confirm VRC efficacy.
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