HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Personal Folders Download to citation manager Author home page(s): Jorge Sierra Jan T. Christenson Nadia H. Lahlaidi Afksendiyos Kalangos Permission Requests Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Sierra, J. Articles by Kalangos, A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Sierra, J. Articles by Kalangos, A. Related Collections Congenital - cyanotic

Ann Thorac Surg 2007;84:606-611
© 2007 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

---

Original Articles: Cardiovascular

Right Ventricular Outflow Tract Reconstruction: What Conduit to Use? Homograft or Contegra?

^a Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
^b Unit of Pediatric Cardiology, Department of Pediatrics, University Hospital of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland

Accepted for publication March 20, 2007.

^_* Address correspondence to Dr Christenson, Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital of Geneva, 24 rue Micheli-du-Crest, Geneva 14, CH-1211, Switzerland (Email: jan.christenson{at}hcuge.ch).

Presented at the Forty-third Annual Meeting of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons, San Diego, CA, Jan 29–31, 2007.

Background: Both cryopreserved homografts and glutaraldehyde fixed bovine jugular vein grafts (Contegra) are used as conduits for right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) reconstructions in children. Both types of conduits have their pros and cons vividly described in the literature, but so far only a few comparative studies have been presented.

Methods: Between 1993 and 2005, 88 aortic homografts (54 blood-group compatible, iso, and 34 nonblood-group compatible, non-iso) and 50 Contegra conduits were implanted for RVOT reconstruction. Mean age was 4.9 ± 3.6 years, ranging from 1 month to 15 years. The two important primary diagnoses were tetralogy of Fallot (61%), and double-outlet right ventricle with pulmonary stenosis (12%). There were no demographic differences between the groups. The mean graft diameter was 19 mm (homografts) and 15 mm (Contegra).

Results: There were no hospital deaths in the homograft group, whereas 1 patient died of graft unrelated causes in the Contegra group. Postoperative mean gradient was 14.5 ± 11.2 mm Hg (homografts) and 19.8 ± 11.5 mm Hg (Contegra). Freedom from graft dysfunction and reoperation at 2, 5, and 7 years was 88.9%, 87.6%, and 81.3% for all homografts; 100%, 97.4%, and 93.8% for homograft iso; 79.9%, 76.9%, and 66.6% for homograft non-iso; and 94.0%, 90.7%, and 90.7% for Contegra grafts. Moderate valvar regurgitation was seen in 3.4% (homografts) and 8.0% (Contegra). No supravalvar lesions were observed in either group.

Conclusions: Blood-group compatible cryopreserved homografts and Contegra conduits for RVOT reconstruction have very similar performance as long as 7 years postoperatively, and are significantly superior to nonblood-group compatible homografts.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				H. A. Vohra, C. Jones, N. Viola, and M. P. Haw Use of extra corporeal membrane oxygenation in the management of sepsis secondary to an infected right ventricle-to-pulmonary artery Contegra conduit in an adult patient Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery, February 1, 2009; 8(2): 272 - 274. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Ando and Y. Takahashi Ten-year experience with handmade trileaflet polytetrafluoroethylene valved conduit used for pulmonary reconstruction. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., January 1, 2009; 137(1): 124 - 131. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]