Abstract

BackgroundThe aim of the present study was to compare the clinical outcome of the David operation and the Bentall operation in patients with Stanford type A acute aortic dissection (AADA) from the viewpoint of hemostasis.MethodsBetween April 2016 and April 2020, 235 patients underwent emergent surgery for AADA. Of them, 38 patients required aortic root replacement (ARR: The David operation 17, the Bentall operation 21). The mean age was 59.3±12.6 years. In the present series, the David operation was the first choice for relatively young people, and the Bentall operation was performed for relatively elderly patients and cases in which valve-sparing seemed impossible.ResultsBetween the David and the Bentall group, the 30-day mortality rate did not differ significantly. However, hemostasis time (144.6±50.3 vs. 212.5±138.1 min, p=0.047), defined as the interval from the cessation of cardio-pulmonary bypass (CPB) to the end of the operation, and total operation time (477.8±85.7 vs. 578.3±173.6 min, p=0.027) were significantly shorter in the David group than in the Bentall group, and the amount of blood transfusion was less in the David group than in the Bentall group (red blood cells: 3.5±3.6 vs. 9.2±5.9 units, p=0.013; fresh frozen plasma: 4.1±4.7 vs 9.4±5.1 units, p=0.002; platelet concentrate: 33.2±11.3 vs 42.2±12.0 units, p=0.025).ConclusionDavid operation offers a shorter hemostasis time and consequently shorter operation time than the Bentall operation in the setting of AADA, probably due to double suture lines, despite its surgical complexity.

Highlights

  • Some patients with acute aortic dissection type A (AADA) require aortic root replacement (ARR) because of the enlarged aortic root, extensive tissue destruction of the aortic root, and/or intimal tears located in the aortic root

  • Hemostasis time (144.6±50.3 vs. 212.5±138.1 min, p=0.047), defined as the interval from the cessation of cardio-pulmonary bypass (CPB) to the end of the operation, and total operation time (477.8±85.7 vs. 578.3±173.6 min, p=0.027) were significantly shorter in the David group than in the Bentall group, and the amount of blood transfusion was less in the David group than in the Bentall group

  • The Bentall operation using a composite graft with a vascular prosthesis and an artificial valve used to be the gold standard [1,2,3], but in recent years, valve-sparing ARR (VSRR) has been gaining attention, especially for young patients [4,5,6,7]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Some patients with acute aortic dissection type A (AADA) require aortic root replacement (ARR) because of the enlarged aortic root, extensive tissue destruction of the aortic root, and/or intimal tears located in the aortic root In such patients, the Bentall operation using a composite graft with a vascular prosthesis and an artificial valve used to be the gold standard [1,2,3], but in recent years, valve-sparing ARR (VSRR) has been gaining attention, especially for young patients [4,5,6,7]. The aim of the present study was to compare the clinical outcome of the David operation and the Bentall operation in patients with Stanford type A acute aortic dissection (AADA) from the viewpoint of hemostasis

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
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