Demonstrates higher complete repair rates with RV-PA connection than shunts in pulmonary atresia with ventricular septal defect, suggesting better rehabilitative value.
Background: Both systemic-to-pulmonary shunt and right ventricle-pulmonary artery (RV-PA) connection are extensively applied to initially rehabilitate the pulmonary artery in pulmonary atresia with the ventricle septal defect (PA/VSD). However, which of these options is the most ideal for promoting pulmonary artery development and improving outcomes remains controversial. Methods: A total of 109 PA/VSD patients undergoing initial rehabilitative surgery at Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital from 2010 to 2020 were enrolled in this study. A series of clinical data were collected to compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes between systemic-to-pulmonary and RV-PA connection. Results: The mean duration of follow-up was 61.1 months in the systemic-to-pulmonary shunt group and 70.3 months in the RV-PA connection group (p > 0.05). The RV-PA connection technique resulted in a significantly higher PaO2, lower red blood cells (RBC), lower hemoglobin, and lower hematocrit (Hct) (p < 0.05). The cumulative incidence curve estimated a cumulative complete repair rate of 56 ± 7% after 5 years in the RV-PA connection group, significantly higher than 36 ± 7% after 5 years in the systemic-to-pulmonary shunt group (p < 0.05). The Kaplan-Meier curve revealed a similar estimated survival rate between the two groups (p = 0.73). The RV-PA connection was identified as an independent predictor for complete repair in the multivariable analysis (HR = 2.348, 95% CI = 1.131–4.873). Conclusions: The RV-PA connection is a more ideal initial rehabilitative technique than systemic-to-pulmonary shunt in treating PA/VSD as a consequence of comparable probability of survival but improved definitive complete repair rate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: