4.6 Article

Graft revision after transit time flow measurement in off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CARDIO-THORACIC SURGERY
卷 17, 期 3, 页码 287-293

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S1010-7940(00)00332-8

关键词

transit time flow measurement; off-coronary pulmonary bypass; graft; revision

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To determine whether coronary graft patency can be predicted by transit time flow measurement (TTFM). Methods: From May 1 1997 to December 31 1998, TTFM was prospectively evaluated in 409 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) without cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). All grafts (1145) were tested with TTFM. Results: Thirty-seven out of 1145 grafts (3.2%) were revised in 33 patients (7.6%). In six cases (18.1%) use of CPB was necessary during revision due to hemodynamic instability. The remaining patients underwent revision off-pump. Thirty-four grafts (91.9%) were revised for both low flow and abnormal flow curve patterns. Findings at revision included: thrombosis of the anastomosis (n = 6), stenosis at the toe or heel of the anastomosis (rt = 8), coronary flap or dissection (n = 5), dissection of the internal mammary artery (n = 5), graft kinking (n = 4), flap at proximal anastomosis (n = 1), coronary stenosis distal to the graft (n = 3), and no findings (n = 2). After revision all flow values and flow patterns improved. Although three additional grafts (8.1%) were revised for low flow (<7 ml/min) despite normal flow patterns, there were no findings at revision and flow values and curves remained unchanged after revision. Postoperatively, one patient developed a stroke (3%), one had an acute myocardial infarction (MI) (3%), one had a sternal wound infection (3%), and one required prolonged ventilatory support (3%). Conclusion: Evaluation of TTFM is valuable in determining the status of a coronary graft after CABG. Correct interpretation of flow patterns allows for correction of abnormalities prior to chest closure. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据