Clinical Outcomes of VasoRing Connector in Patients With Acute Type A Aortic Dissection

I. Ming Chen, Po Lin Chen, Shih Hsien Weng, Chiao Po Hsu, Chun Che Shih, Hsiao Huang Chang, Jeng Wei

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)764-770
Number of pages7
JournalAnnals of Thoracic Surgery
Volume106
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 1 2018
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Sutures
Dissection
Operative Time
Hemorrhage
Reoperation
Suture Techniques
Postoperative Hemorrhage
Cardiopulmonary Bypass
Taiwan
Acute Kidney Injury
Blood Transfusion
Renal Dialysis
Aorta
Technology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Clinical Outcomes of VasoRing Connector in Patients With Acute Type A Aortic Dissection. / Chen, I. Ming; Chen, Po Lin; Weng, Shih Hsien; Hsu, Chiao Po; Shih, Chun Che; Chang, Hsiao Huang; Wei, Jeng.

In: Annals of Thoracic Surgery, Vol. 106, No. 3, 01.09.2018, p. 764-770.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Chen, I. Ming ; Chen, Po Lin ; Weng, Shih Hsien ; Hsu, Chiao Po ; Shih, Chun Che ; Chang, Hsiao Huang ; Wei, Jeng. / Clinical Outcomes of VasoRing Connector in Patients With Acute Type A Aortic Dissection. In: Annals of Thoracic Surgery. 2018 ; Vol. 106, No. 3. pp. 764-770.
@article{19098cd8565440b58bc403d986874464,
title = "Clinical Outcomes of VasoRing Connector in Patients With Acute Type A Aortic Dissection",
abstract = "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.",
author = "Chen, {I. Ming} and Chen, {Po Lin} and Weng, {Shih Hsien} and Hsu, {Chiao Po} and Shih, {Chun Che} and Chang, {Hsiao Huang} and Jeng Wei",
year = "2018",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.03.056",
language = "English",
volume = "106",
pages = "764--770",
journal = "Annals of Thoracic Surgery",
issn = "0003-4975",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinical Outcomes of VasoRing Connector in Patients With Acute Type A Aortic Dissection

AU - Chen, I. Ming

AU - Chen, Po Lin

AU - Weng, Shih Hsien

AU - Hsu, Chiao Po

AU - Shih, Chun Che

AU - Chang, Hsiao Huang

AU - Wei, Jeng

PY - 2018/9/1

Y1 - 2018/9/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85051028437&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85051028437&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.03.056

DO - 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.03.056

M3 - Article

C2 - 29705370

AN - SCOPUS:85051028437

VL - 106

SP - 764

EP - 770

JO - Annals of Thoracic Surgery

JF - Annals of Thoracic Surgery

SN - 0003-4975

IS - 3

ER -