| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Ann Thorac Surg 2001;72:1225-1231
© 2001 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons
a Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, The University of Texas at Houston Medical School, Memorial Hermann Hospital, Houston, Texas, USA
Address reprint requests to Dr Safi, Department of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, The University of Texas at Houston Medical School, UTH Medical Center, 6410 Fannin St, Suite 450, Houston, TX 77030
e-mail: hazim.j.safi{at}uth.tmc.edu
Presented at the Thirty-seventh Annual Meeting of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons, New Orleans, LA, Jan 29–31, 2001.
 |
Abstract |
|---|
 Top Abstract IntroductionMaterial and methodsResultsCommentDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Methods. Between February 1991 and March 2000, we performed 654 repairs of the thoracic and thoracoabdominal aorta. The median age was 67 years and 420 (64%) patients were male. Forty-five cases (6.9%) were performed emergently. Distribution of TAAA was the following: extent I, 164 (25%); extent II, 165 (25%); extent III, 61 (9%); extent IV, 95 (15%); extent V, 23 (3.5%); and descending thoracic, 147 (22%). The adjuncts cerebrospinal fluid drainage and distal aortic perfusion were used in 428 cases (65%).
Results. Thirty-day mortality was 14% (94 of 654). The in-hospital mortality was 16% (106 of 654). Early neurologic deficits occurred in 33 patients (5.0%). Overall, 14 of 428 (3.3%) neurologic deficits were observed in the adjunct group, and 19 of 226 (8.4%) in the nonadjunct group (p = 0.004). When the adjuncts were used during extent II repair, the incidence was 10 of 129 (7.8%) compared with 11 of 36 (30.6%) in the nonadjunct group (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that risk factors for neurologic deficit were cerebrovascular disease and extent of TAAA (II and III) (p < 0.05).
Conclusions. The combined adjuncts of distal aortic perfusion and cerebrospinal fluid drainage demonstrated improved neurologic outcome with repair of thoracic and TAAAs. In extent II aneurysms, adjuncts continue to make a considerable difference in the outcome and to provide significant protection against spinal cord morbidity. Future research should focus on spinal cord protection in patients with high-risk extent II aneurysms.
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterial and methodsResultsCommentDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Many methods have been devised to protect the spinal cord during aortic surgery. These include active and passive distal aortic perfusion, total cardiopulmonary bypass, profound hypothermic circulatory arrest, direct spinal cord cooling, cerebrospinal fluid drainage, monitoring of somatosensory and motor-evoked potentials, and pharmacologic methods using papaverine, nalaxone, or steroids. These adjuncts have had varying degrees of success in preventing neurologic deficit [3–9]. Despite these advances, neurologic deficit still remains a significant obstacle in the treatment of aortic aneurysms.
The purpose of this study was to review our experience with repair of thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms and determine the effect of the combined adjuncts of distal aortic perfusion and cerebrospinal fluid drainage on neurologic outcome.
|
Material and methods |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterial and methodsResultsCommentDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Patient characteristics at the time of repair are listed in Table 1. There were 420 men (64%) and 234 women (36%). Patient age ranged from 8 to 88 years (mean 67 years). Forty-five cases (6.9%) were performed emergently. One hundred and sixty-four (25.1%) involved extent I; 165 (25.2%) extent II; 61 (9.3%) extent III; 95 (14.5%) extent IV; 23 (3.5%) extent V; and 146 (22.5%) descending thoracic. The adjuncts cerebrospinal fluid drainage and distal aortic perfusion were used in 428 (65%) cases. This was compared with the group of 226 (35%) cases who did not have the combined adjuncts applied, and were operated upon utilizing either the simple clamp-sew, or distal aortic perfusion only.
|
For the proximal anastomosis of the descending thoracic, extent I, or II thoracoabdominal aneurysms, the inclusion technique is not used and complete transection of the aorta is undertaken to separate the aorta from the underlying esophagus [1]. Distal aortic perfusion is begun as the cross-clamp is applied. For extensive aneurysms, sequential clamping is used, and after completion of the proximal anastomosis, the mid-descending aortic clamp is moved distally to the infrarenal aorta to accommodate intercostal and visceral reattachment. Reattachment of patent, lower intercostal arteries (T8 to T12) is performed routinely except in cases of occluded arteries, heavily calcified or atheromatous aorta, or when technically not feasible.
With completion of intercostal reattachment, the abdominal aorta, above the distal clamp, is opened and the visceral vessels are identified. The celiac, superior mesenteric, and renal arteries are perfused using no. 9 Pruitt catheters (Cryolife, St. Petersburg, FL) (Fig 1). The cold perfusate (blood at 4°C) that is delivered to the viscera is dependent on proximal aortic pressure and maintained between 300 and 600 mL/min. Renal temperature is directly monitored and maintained at approximately 15°C. Because cold visceral perfusion may cause hypothermia, core body temperature is kept between 32°C and 33°C by warming the lower circulation (ie, lower extremities). If a distal clamp cannot be placed due to technical reasons and distal circulatory warming cannot be performed, cold visceral perfusion is avoided to prevent core body cooling that may result in cardiac dysrhythmias.
|
Postoperatively, the mean arterial pressure is maintained between 80 and 100 mm Hg. CSF is drained to maintain a CSF pressure of less than 10 mm Hg for 3 days. If a delayed neurologic deficit appears after removal of the drain, the CSF drain is immediately reinserted to decrease the CSF pressure. This may lead to the resolution of the deficit [11].
Outcome variables
All preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data were collected prospectively over a 9-year period and entered into a database. Analysis was retrospective. Preoperative characteristics analyzed in this study and listed in Table 1 included age, gender, hypertension, cerebrovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, acute dissection, chronic dissection, and aneurysm extent. Intraoperative data included aortic cross-clamp time and the combined adjuncts (cerebrospinal fluid drainage and distal aortic perfusion) used.
Thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms were classified according to the modified Crawford classification (Fig 2). Operative mortality was defined as death occurring within 30 days of surgery. In-hospital mortality was defined as death occurring during hospitalization. Early neurologic deficit was defined as either paraplegia or paraparesis observed upon the patient awakening from anesthesia, regardless of severity. Any neurologic deficit that occurred after a period of observed normal neurologic function was considered delayed neurologic deficit. Patients with stroke were identified by a thorough neurologic examination and computed tomographic scan of the head. Aneurysms with dissection were considered acute if surgery was performed in less than 14 days from the onset of pain, and chronic if after 14 days. Cerebrovascular disease is defined as any previous history of cerebrovascular accident, or having undergone intervention for carotid artery disease. Emergent refers to cases that were performed for rupture, whether contained or free-rupture.
|
2 statistics are reported for hypothesis tests. Where a zero cell was present in a table, odds ratio was computed using a zero-cell correction and the confidence interval was computed using the logit method. For tables greater than 2 x 2, 2 statistics were computed for hypothesis tests, and univariate logistic regression estimates were also computed keeping data in their native continuous distribution. Values of p and confidence intervals for continuous data are based on maximum-likelihood estimates. The null hypothesis was rejected at p less than 0.05. |
Results |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterial and methodsResultsCommentDiscussionReferences |
|---|
For operative factors, the aortic ischemic time was an independent predictor of neurologic deficit (p = 0.01). When the combined adjuncts of cerebrospinal fluid drainage and distal aortic perfusion were used during repair, the incidence of neurologic deficit for all aneurysm types was 3.3% (14 of 428), compared with 8.4% (19 of 226) when the combined adjuncts were not used (p = 0.004). For extent II TAAA, the incidence of neurologic deficit was 7.8% (10 of 129) with adjuncts, versus 30.6% (11 of 36) without adjuncts (p < 0.001). Logistic regression analysis was performed comparing the risk of neurologic deficit with aortic ischemic time, and demonstrated that the use of the combined adjuncts was protective. The greatest reduction in the incidence of neurologic deficit was observed in the extent II TAAA group (p = 0.003) (Fig 3).
|
|
|
Comment |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterial and methodsResultsCommentDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Previous studies analyzing cerebrospinal fluid drainage and distal aortic perfusion individually did not demonstrate a dramatic benefit in the prevention of neurologic deficit [12, 13]. The limitations of these studies have been cited previously [3, 5]. More recently, a review of cerebrospinal fluid drainage during thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair demonstrated that the benefit might not be substantiated [14]. However, since those earlier studies that found no advantages in the use of cerebrospinal fluid drainage or distal aortic perfusion, we have demonstrated the importance of the combination of these adjuncts upon neurologic outcome [3, 15]. Moreover, recent studies have shown distal aortic perfusion and cerebrospinal fluid drainage to be effective in reducing neurologic deficit when these adjuncts are applied separately [5, 16, 17]. Thus, it is our continued approach to use these adjuncts in combination in order to increase the tolerance of the spinal cord to ischemia.
Improving "ischemic tolerance" of the spinal cord theoretically occurs by reversing the decreased distal aortic pressure and increased cerebrospinal fluid pressure during aortic cross-clamping [15]. A decrease in distal aortic pressure leads to a decrease in spinal artery perfusion pressure. A concomitant rise in CSF pressure from aortic cross-clamping may also lead to decreased spinal cord perfusion resulting in spinal cord ischemia. The combination of distal aortic perfusion and cerebrospinal fluid drainage may augment the spinal cord perfusion and provide spinal cord ischemic tolerance.
In previous reports, the extent of the thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm has been associated with neurologic deficits, implicating both extent I and II as having the highest risk [1, 2]. In this study, extent II TAAA was significantly associated with neurologic deficits (p = 0.001). However, the incidence of neurologic deficits for extent I TAAAs was 0.6% (1 of 164) and was not significantly associated with neurologic outcome. A recent contemporary report has also reported a low incidence of neurologic deficit with extent I TAAA [18]. With the use of the combined adjuncts, the beneficial effect of preventing neurologic deficit with non-high-risk TAAAs may become statistically less dramatic. Thus, with use of the combined adjuncts, extent I TAAAs may be similar to descending thoracic, extent IV, or extent V TAAAs in regard to neurologic deficit.
Extent III TAAA, however, was shown to be significantly associated with neurologic deficit (p = 0.0002). In reclassifying TAAAs, many of the extent V TAAAs, which have a low risk for neurologic deficit, were previously classified as extent III. Thus, the reclassification and reduction of cases in the extent III TAAA group may be responsible for this extent becoming associated with neurologic deficit.
The use of the combined adjunct of cerebrospinal fluid drainage and distal aortic perfusion was demonstrated to improve neurologic outcome for the entire group of thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repairs (p = 0.04). Though a reduction in the incidence of neurologic deficits was observed with each extent of aneurysm when the combined adjunct was used, the greatest reduction was noted for extent II thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (30.6% neurologic deficit without adjunct vs 7.8% with adjunct, p < 0.001).
A history of cerebrovascular disease was demonstrated to be an independent risk factor for neurologic deficit in this study. The significance of this is uncertain at this time, and its relevance is under further investigation. Moreover, intercostal artery reattachment has previously been demonstrated to be beneficial in regard to neurologic deficit [19]. Although we emphasize the importance of intercostal artery reattachment, its significance to spinal cord protection was inconclusive here (p = 0.46).
The limitation of this study is that it is retrospective. In addition, our current strategy for providing ischemic tolerance to the spinal cord does include intercostal artery reattachment, mild heparinization, and moderate hypothermia, but these factors were not controlled throughout the length of the study period. The study was not randomized because it represented an evolution in technique since 1991.
With modern techniques, early neurologic deficits have fallen to below 5% in all TAAAs except extent II TAAA. Consequently, the beneficial effect of adjuncts is most dramatic in patients with extent II aneurysms. In extent II aneurysms, adjuncts continue to make a considerable difference in outcome and to provide "ischemic tolerance" and significant protection against spinal cord morbidity. Though this study supports the combined use of distal aortic perfusion and cerebrospinal fluid drainage for the prevention of neurologic deficits, it must be reiterated that the cause of neurologic deficits after repair of descending and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms is multifactorial. Future research should focus on spinal cord protection in patients with high-risk extent II TAAAs.
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterial and methodsResultsCommentDiscussionReferences |
|---|
There are several papers, including prospective randomized studies, showing the validity of using distal aortic perfusion and also CSF drainage. The most recent paper to be published by Dr Coselli in patients with Type I and Type II thoracoabdominal aneurysms also showed a protective effect. In 1998, we reported a prospective randomized study of Type I and Type II thoracoabdominal aneurysm repair with the addition of active cooling by atrial-femoral bypass. In logistic regression comparison of the aortic cross-clamp versus the incidence of neurologic injury, there was a significant protective effect with CSF drainage and combined intrathecal papaverine and also with active cooling on atrio-femoral bypass. The greatest protective effect, with very marked shifting of the curve to the right, was with the combination of all these protective measures (CSF drainage, intrathecal papaverine, and active cooling).
Thus, there is good evidence, including the study presented today, that CSF drainage with atrio-femoral bypass is protective and, in addition, based on our data, it would appear that active cooling prior to aortic cross-clamping is also further protective. It should also be noted that CSF drainage was first advocated by Drs Blaisdell and Cooley nearly 40 years ago and only now has received widespread acceptance.
I have several questions for the authors. First, the authors do not state in the paper to what temperature they allow their patients to cool before aortic cross-clamping, if at all. What was their systemic temperature policy during the study and has it changed over time? Do they have any data as to what the systemic temperature was when they cross-clamped the aorta and its influence on outcome?
They do not report examining the influence of date of operation on results. It would be interesting to know how this influenced their results, since presumably the patients done in the earlier part of the study did not necessarily all have atrio-femoral bypass with CSF drainage. This may have affected the improved results with the combination of treatments.
Did all the patients in the adjunct group have both CSF drainage and atrio-femoral bypass? If the patients only had CSF drainage or atrio-femoral bypass alone, were there benefits found in comparison with patients who had neither?
In their study, the Type III thoracoabdominal aneurysms had a higher than expected rate of paraplegia and paraparesis. Clearly, this is influenced by their reclassification of some of their patients in their new classification of Type V, however, was atrio-femoral bypass used less frequently in these patients as has been advocated by some authors?
In this study, the authors drained CSF when the pressure exceeded 10 cm of mercury. Is there any reason why the authors do not allow free gravity drainage during the period of aortic cross-clamping, a method that we have used? Do the authors have any data on the amount of CSF drained during the period of aortic cross-clamping and its influence on neurologic injury?
In the multivariate analysis, the authors found for the first time that cerebrovascular disease was a risk factor for postoperative paraplegia and paraparesis, namely 11.4% versus 4.2%. Can the authors comment on why they think this may have been a factor in their study that has not been reported previously?
Finally, the authors have advocated CSF drainage for delayed paraplegia after surgery. It is our impression that this is an increasingly vexing problem as we are more effective in preventing initial paraplegia and paraparesis. It would be interesting to know what the authors’ results have been with delayed insertion or repeat insertion of an intrathecal catheter for CSF drainage.
The authors are to be congratulated on a fine paper and their excellent results, and confirming the trend and the decreased incidence of paraplegia and paraparesis after both descending and thoracoabdominal aneurysm repairs, particularly with the use of the adjuncts of distal aortic perfusion and CSF drainage.
Thank you.
DR ESTRERA: I would like to thank Dr Svensson for all his kind comments and the very intriguing questions.
In reference to systemic temperature, we do not actively cool prior to aortic cross-clamping. We use passive hypothermia to about 32°C. We do actively cool the viscera to approximately 15°C, as with an extent II thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm, once the aortic cross-clamps are applied. The benefit of using distal aortic perfusion with an in-line heat exchanger is related to the prevention of dysrhythmias that may occur with visceral cooling. In reference to the systemic temperature before clamping, we have gathered these data, but we have not analyzed it.
In reference to the subgroupings of the adjunct group, all patients in the combined adjunct group used both distal aortic perfusion and cerebrospinal fluid drainage. The noncombined group had only distal aortic perfusion or the just clamp and sew. There were no cases of cerebrospinal fluid drainage alone with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Because the event rate was relatively low, the benefit of just distal aortic perfusion was not significant.
In reference to the extent III thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm, it was previously determined that the extent III group had a low probability of neurologic deficit. However, since our reclassification in 1997 adding the extent V, some of the extent III aneurysms were now reclassified as extent V. Because the extent V aneurysms appear to have a similar neurologic deficit rate as the extent IV aneurysms, this may have caused the extent III aneurysms to become a risk factor for neurologic deficit. Why did Dr Safi reclassify these aneurysms? The extent V group was conceived to include those aneurysms that did not exactly fit the criteria of the extent I or the extent III aneurysm. We did not use the combined adjuncts less frequently with the extent III aneurysms.
In reference to cerebrospinal fluid drainage, we used open drainage of the cerebrospinal fluid only when the pressure exceeded 10 mm Hg during the case. Data on the exact amount of cerebrospinal fluid have been collected, but we have not analyzed this as to its relation to neurologic outcome.
In reference to the history of cerebrovascular disease as a significant factor for neurologic deficit, we are currently looking at this finding, and its significance is uncertain.
Finally, we have had 15 cases of delayed paraplegia. We feel that this is different from immediate paraplegia because the events related to this complication appear to be different from those that occur intraoperatively. Our analysis of these cases has revealed blood pressure instability (ie, low blood pressure) as a significant factor. We do advocate the use of cerebrospinal fluid drainage when this complication does occur, and our success rate has been around 50%. Success appears to be dependent upon early identification and reinsertion of the drain.
DR C. E. ANAGNOSTOPOULOS (New York, NY and Ioannina, Greece): Did the incidence of reattachment of intercostal arteries T8 to T12 vary in the extent II from the other groups, and have you tried Griepp’s method of successive ligation instead of reattachment for ischemic preconditioning?
DR ESTRERA: We have not utilized ligation for ischemic preconditioning. Reattachment of the intercostal arteries did vary depending on patency of T8 to T12. It is our policy to reattach whenever possible.
What is important to understand is this study is a retrospective analysis, and it is an evolution in Dr Safi’s technique over the past 9 years. As you have seen, we have tried to provide a method that allows ischemic tolerance to the spinal cord, and there are many methods to accomplish this. Factors that cause paraplegia are multifactorial, and there is not just one method to prevent this. What we have shown here is the benefit of our technique, which is the use of cerebrospinal fluid drainage and distal aortic perfusion.
|
References |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterial and methodsResultsCommentDiscussionReferences |
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. F. Conrad and R. P. Cambria Contemporary Management of Descending Thoracic and Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms: Endovascular Versus Open Circulation, February 12, 2008; 117(6): 841 - 852. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. D. Etz, M. Luehr, F. A. Kari, C. A. Bodian, D. Smego, K. A. Plestis, and R. B. Griepp Paraplegia after extensive thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair: does critical spinal cord ischemia occur postoperatively? J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., February 1, 2008; 135(2): 324 - 330. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. Uotani, N. Yamada, A.K. Kono, T. Taniguchi, K. Sugimoto, M. Fujii, A. Kitagawa, Y. Okita, H. Naito, and K. Sugimura Preoperative Visualization of the Artery of Adamkiewicz by Intra-Arterial CT Angiography AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., February 1, 2008; 29(2): 314 - 318. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. E. Achouh, A. L. Estrera, C. C. Miller III, A. Azizzadeh, A. Irani, T. L. Wegryn, and H. J. Safi Role of Somatosensory Evoked Potentials in Predicting Outcome During Thoracoabdominal Aortic Repair Ann. Thorac. Surg., September 1, 2007; 84(3): 782 - 788. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Winnerkvist, R. E. Anderson, L.-O. Hansson, L. Rosengren, A. E. Estrera, T. T.T. Huynh, E. E. Porat, and H. J. Safi Multilevel somatosensory evoked potentials and cerebrospinal proteins: indicators of spinal cord injury in thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm surgery Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., April 1, 2007; 31(4): 637 - 642. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Nojiri, K. Matsumoto, A. Kato, T. Miho, K. Furukawa, S. Ohtsubo, T. Itoh, and S. Kudo The Adamkiewicz artery: demonstration by intra-arterial computed tomographic angiography Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., February 1, 2007; 31(2): 249 - 255. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. Yoshioka, H. Niinuma, S. Ehara, T. Nakajima, M. Nakamura, and K. Kawazoe MR Angiography and CT Angiography of the Artery of Adamkiewicz: State of the Art RadioGraphics, October 1, 2006; 26(suppl_1): S63 - S73. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. W.G. Elbers, P. de Haan, I. Vanicky, D. Legemate, and M. Dzoljic Effect of Temporary Visceral Ischemia on Spinal Cord Ischemic Damage in the Rabbit Ann. Thorac. Surg., March 1, 2006; 81(3): 910 - 917. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. J. Safi, A. L. Estrera, C. C. Miller, T. T. Huynh, E. E. Porat, A. Azizzadeh, R. Meada, and J. S. Goodrick Evolution of Risk for Neurologic Deficit After Descending and Thoracoabdominal Aortic Repair Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 2005; 80(6): 2173 - 2179. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. T. Hassoun, M. D. Dake, L. G. Svensson, R. K. Greenberg, R. P. Cambria, R. D. Moore, and J. S. Matsumura Multi-institutional Pivotal Trial of the Zenith TX2 Thoracic Aortic Stent-Graft for Treatment of Descending Thoracic Aortic Aneurysms: Clinical Study Design Perspectives in Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Therapy, September 1, 2005; 17(3): 255 - 264. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. R. Puchakalaya and K. K. Tremper Brown-Sequard Syndrome Following Removal of a Cerebrospinal Fluid Drainage Catheter After Thoracic Aortic Surgery Anesth. Analg., August 1, 2005; 101(2): 322 - 324. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. Kawaharada, K. Morishita, H. Hyodoh, Y. Fujisawa, J. Fukada, Y. Hachiro, Y. Kurimoto, and T. Abe Magnetic resonance angiographic localization of the artery of Adamkiewicz for spinal cord blood supply Ann. Thorac. Surg., September 1, 2004; 78(3): 846 - 851. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Morishita, G. Murakami, Y. Fujisawa, N. Kawaharada, J. Fukada, T. Saito, and T. Abe Anatomical study of blood supply to the spinal cord Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 2003; 76(6): 1967 - 1971. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. L. Estrera, C. C. Miller III, T. T. T. Huynh, A. Azizzadeh, E. E. Porat, A. Vinnerkvist, C. Ignacio, R. Sheinbaum, and H. J. Safi Preoperative and operative predictors of delayed neurologic deficit following repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., November 1, 2003; 126(5): 1288 - 1294. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H J Safi and P R Taylor Open surgery for thoracic aortic disease Heart, August 1, 2003; 89(8): 825 - 826. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Suzuki, C. A. Davis III, C. C. Miller III, T. T.T. Huynh, A. L. Estrera, E. E. Porat, A. Vinnerkvist, and H. J. Safi Cardiac function predicts mortality following thoracoabdominal and descending thoracic aortic aneurysm repair Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., July 1, 2003; 24(1): 119 - 124. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. C. Halstead, M. Baghai, E. Lim, J. J. Dunning, and S. R. Large A method for descending thoracic aortic replacement retaining a posterior strip bearing intercostal vessels Ann. Thorac. Surg., May 1, 2003; 75(5): 1660 - 1661. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
I. K. Toumpoulis, C. E. Anagnostopoulos, G. E. Drossos, V. D. Malamou-Mitsi, L. S. Pappa, and D. G. Katritsis Early ischemic preconditioning without hypotension prevents spinal cord injury caused by descending thoracic aortic occlusion J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., May 1, 2003; 125(5): 1030 - 1036. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. G. Svensson, L. Khitin, E. M. Nadolny, and W. A. Kimmel Systemic Temperature and Paralysis After Thoracoabdominal and Descending Aortic Operations Arch Surg, February 1, 2003; 138(2): 175 - 179. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ANN THORAC SURG | ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN | EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG |
| J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG | ICVTS | ALL CTSNet JOURNALS |
