Abstract

AbstractBackgroundNotwithstanding the controversies evoked by the term “single ventricle”, most patients with this condition would undergo the Fontan procedure. In addition, there is a large group of patients in whom a biventricular repair would be abandoned in favour of a univentricular one because of the presence of unfavourable morphologic features. There is a need for a uniformly acceptable system of nomenclature that would permit precise description and classification of hearts with complex malformations to facilitate reporting and help in understanding the reasons for choosing a univentricular repair.MethodsEchocardiographic, angiographic and operative records of 240 patients undergoing the Fontan procedure were analysed.ResultsOut of the 104 patients with univentricular atrioventricular connections, 2 ventricles were discernible in all but 3 patients. A Fontan repair was performed in 136 patients with biventricular atrioventricular connections because of the presence of a hypoplastic ventricle in 52 patients and a non-committed ventricular septal defect in the remaining 84.ConclusionsThe Fontan operation is probably the only definitive treatment option for patients with univentricular atrioventricular connections. The decision to perform a univentricular repair in preference to a biventricular one in hearts with biventricular atrioventricular connections is based on the presence of a hypoplastic ventricle or a non-reroutable ventricular septal defect. This decision is subjective. In hearts with discordant atrioventricular connections and pulmonary stenosis, we prefer the Fontan operation to the classical repair.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call