Why the study?
The safety and effectiveness of hybrid cerebral perfusion in open total or partial aortic arch replacement needed to be evaluated.
Does hybrid cerebral perfusion improve safety and reduce operative mortality compared to antegrade-only perfusion in adult patients undergoing open total/partial arch replacement?
Does hybrid cerebral perfusion improve safety and reduce operative mortality compared to antegrade-only perfusion in adult patients undergoing open total/partial arch replacement?
Hybrid cerebral perfusion in total or partial aortic arch replacement demonstrates a strong safety profile and may reduce operative mortality compared to antegrade-only techniques.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Hybrid perfusion may be feasible in arch replacement; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective trials before practice change.
Objective: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of hybrid cerebral perfusion in open total/partial arch replacement. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of all adult patients (n = 366) undergoing open total/partial arch replacement from January 1993 through December 2024. Cerebral perfusion strategies included hybrid (retrograde followed by antegrade; n = 223, 60.9%), antegrade-only (n = 100, 27.4%), retrograde-only (n = 17, 5.0%), and deep hypothermic circulatory arrest alone without cerebral perfusion (n = 26, 7.1%). For comparison, patients were grouped as antegrade-only versus hybrid. The operative mortality was greater in the antegrade-only group. Conclusions: Hybrid cerebral perfusion in total/partial arch replacement demonstrates a strong safety profile with excellent early outcomes, including in complex or redo cases.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ergi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: