Key result
Different cerebral perfusion methods and cerebral protection techniques for thoracic aorta surgery using hypothermic circulatory arrest are reviewed to evaluate their theoretical impact, pros, and cons.
Why the study?
What is the theoretical impact of different cerebral perfusion techniques and methods of cerebral protection during ascending and aortic arch surgery?
What is the theoretical impact of different cerebral perfusion techniques and methods of cerebral protection during ascending and aortic arch surgery?
This review provides a theoretical evaluation of various cerebral protection techniques used during aortic arch surgery to mitigate neurological complications.
Theoretical comparisons leave optimal perfusion technique open; extends literature but requires randomized trials before guiding aortic surgery.
Operations on the thoracic aorta using hypothermic circulatory arrest are still associated with significant morbidity and mortality due to neurological complications. During the last decades, different cerebral protection techniques have been introduced into clinical practice to reduce the incidence of such complications. Furthermore clinical as well as basic researches have been performed to improve the outcome after these operations. Currently different cerebral perfusion methods are in clinical use and the superiority of one or the other method is a matter of controversial discussion. This review has been undertaken to evaluate the theoretical impact of these different methods of cerebral protection. Based on the experience of the authors the pros and cons are discussed with clinical and experimental reports from the literature.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Christian Hagl (2003) conducted a review in Thoracic aorta surgery using hypothermic circulatory arrest. Cerebral perfusion techniques and cerebral protection methods was evaluated. Different cerebral perfusion methods and cerebral protection techniques for thoracic aorta surgery using hypothermic circulatory arrest are reviewed to evaluate their theoretical impact, pros, and cons.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: