Quality of life: modified triple-branched stent graft implantation versus frozen elephant trunk technique

4Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objective: To compare the effects of modified triple-branched stent implantation and frozen elephant trunk technique on the quality of life (QoL) of acute Stanford Type A aortic dissection (AAAD) patients at different follow-up times. Methods: Data from 175 AAAD survivors was collected which were divided into two groups according to different surgical techniques: (group A): modified triple-branched stent graft implantation; (group B): frozen elephant trunk. The SF-36 were used to assess the QoL at discharge (AD), the third postoperative month (POM3), and the twelfth postoperative month (POM12). Results: (1) The total scores at each time of both groups showed lower than the normal level; Group A scored higher than group B at some time points in terms of some items (role physical, role emotion and mental health; all P = 0.000), and some items at POM3 or POM12 scored higher than at discharge (role physical, social function; both P = 0.000). (2) There were less patients with heavy self-perceived burden in group A than group B at discharge (P = 0.032) and patients with heavy self-perceived burden decreased over time. (3) Young postoperative AAD patients (P = 0.002) in group B (P = 0.005) with heavy self-perceived burden (P = 0.000), acute renal failure (P = 0.008), long LOS (P = 0.026) and blood loss (> 1000 mL/24 h) (P = 0.039) seemed to get a worse QoL. Conclusion: The impact on QoL of the modified triple-branched stent graft implantation technique seemed to be better than those of frozen elephant trunk surgery in role physical, role emotion and mental health.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Luo, Z. R., Tang, M. R., Li, J. H., Chen, L. W., & Yan, L. L. (2021). Quality of life: modified triple-branched stent graft implantation versus frozen elephant trunk technique. Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13019-021-01683-9

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free