Preliminary results of single centre experience with the “release and
perfuse technique” during aortic arch surgery.
Abstract
Background and aim of the study To evaluate whether the release
and perfuse technique implies a circulatory arrest time comparable with
or shorter than those of standard Frozen Elephant Trunk technique in
aortic arch surgery. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the
records of patients who had undergone aortic arch repair with Release
and Perfuse Technique (RPT) or standard Frozen Elephant Trunk (FET) at
our Institution between January 2018 and May 2021. Primary endpoints
were the comparison of circulatory arrest time, perioperative variables,
and complications between two groups. A propensity score weighting
approach was used for data analysis. Results A total of 41
patients underwent aortic arch surgery were analyzed:15 (37%) and 26
(63 %) in RPT and FET group, respectively. The use of RPT showed a
significant shorter circulatory arrest times than FET: 9 min vs 58 min
(P < 0.001), respectively. The median lactates peak in the
first 24h post intervention was 2.6 for RPT group and 5.4 mmol/L for FET
group, (P <0.0001). When compared with the FET, RPT is
associated with significant reduction in the use of packed red blood
cells (P <0.0001), fresh frozen plasma (P <0.0001),
platelet concentrate (P <0.0001), and fibrinogen (P
<0.004). The median ICU stay was 3 and 9 days (P = 0.011),
whereas the median hospital stay was 12 and 18.5 days (P=0.004) in the
RPT and FET groups, respectively. Thirty-day mortality and postoperative
outcomes were comparable between the two groups. Conclusions
Considering the anatomical limitations related to the use of this
technique, the RPT appears to be safe, feasible, and effective in
reducing the circulatory arrest time during aortic arch surgery.
Nevertheless, further studies are required to demonstrate its safety and
efficacy.