These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed


  • Title: Outcomes after the stage I reconstruction comparing the right ventricular to pulmonary artery conduit with the modified Blalock Taussig shunt.
    Author: Tabbutt S, Dominguez TE, Ravishankar C, Marino BS, Gruber PJ, Wernovsky G, Gaynor JW, Nicolson SC, Spray TL.
    Journal: Ann Thorac Surg; 2005 Nov; 80(5):1582-90; discussion 1590-1. PubMed ID: 16242421.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Recent reports advocate that a right ventricular to pulmonary artery (RV-PA) conduit improves outcome after the stage I reconstruction. METHODS: We retrospectively compared the outcomes of all neonates who underwent a stage I reconstruction between January 1, 2002, and October 1, 2004, with use of the RV-PA conduit and modified Blalock-Taussig shunt (mBTS) interspersed over this time period. RESULTS: In all, 149 infants underwent a stage I reconstruction (95 mBTS, 54 RV-PA) for hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS) or variants. There was a preference for the RV-PA conduit in patients with aortic atresia (mBTS 30% versus RV-PA 67%, p < 0.01). There was no difference in surgical mortality (mBTS 14% versus RV-PA 17%, p = 0.67), time to extubation (mBTS 4.5 +/- 4.8 days versus RV-PA 3.9 +/- 3.5 days, p = 0.47), or length of hospital stay (mBTS 25 +/- 29 days versus RV-PA 21 +/- 23 days, p = 0.52). There was an increased incidence of shunt reinterventions in the patients with the RV-PA conduit (mBTS 17% versus RV-PA 32%, p = 0.04). Patients with RV-PA conduit returned earlier for stage II reconstruction (mBTS 6.5 +/- 2.5 months versus RV-PA 5.6 +/- 1.7 months, p = 0.05). There was no difference in overall mortality (mBTS 32% versus RV-PA 30%, p = 0.45) with a median duration of follow-up of 18 +/- 8 months. CONCLUSIONS: Comparing shunt strategies (mBTS versus RV-PA) over the same time period, we found no difference in outcome. These data support the need for a larger prospective, randomized trial.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]