Therapeutic apheresis in low weight patients: technical feasibility, tolerance, compliance, and risks.

The use of therapeutic apheresis in very low weight patients is generally thought to have limitations, because of possible severe adverse reactions, potential risk related to the extracorporeal procedure, due to the low weight of the young patients. A careful therapeutic approach using appropriate precautions, and also introducing modifications to the standard procedure, can minimise the risk without compromising the efficacy of the plasmapheresis. The aim of the study was to evaluate apheresis tolerance and acceptability in children [Artif. Organs. 21 (1997) 1126] and infants [J. Clin. Apheresis 5 (1989) 21] with inherited lipid metabolism disorder, familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), primary hyperlipoproteinemia (lipoprotein phenotype I), and acute leukemia, weighing on average 20.55 kg. One thousand one hundred twenty three aphereses were completed. Three types of apheresis were performed: leukapheresis, plasma exchange, dextran sulphate cellulose (DSC) low density lipoprotein (LDL)-apheresis. Three different types of continuous flow systems were used. Technical adaptation depending on patients blood volume, body mass index, hematocrit, type of system used, permitted us to perform complete aphereses, obtaining a high degree of tolerance and acceptability of the treatment. The use of plasmapheresis is regarded to be an extreme therapeutic measure in children. However, when the need for such treatment is undebatable, plasmapheresis must be done. A well-trained and experienced team can overcome the technical difficulties in order to complete the procedures without complications. The most frequently observed adverse effects are vascular relative access insufficiency (2.0%), and mild hypotension (2.0%).     

Endovascular repair for concomitant multilevel aortic disease.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with multilevel aortic disease represent a small subgroup with the need for extensive surgical treatment at considerable risk. We present our experience of endovascular exclusion for simultaneous thoracic and abdominal aortic disease in four patients. METHODS: Between January 2002 and January 2005, four patients underwent endovascular repair for simultaneous thoracic and abdominal aortic disease. Mean age was 69+/-10 years (range, 60-81). Thoracic lesions included penetrating aortic ulcer (n=2, ruptured=1), atherosclerotic aneurysm (n=1), and chronic type B dissection (n=1). Abdominal aortic disease included atherosclerotic infrarenal (n=3) and juxtarenal (n=1) aortic aneurysms. Thoracic aortic stent-grafts had been the following: Excluder/TAG (n=3) or Talent (n=1) straight tube devices. Abdominal aortic stent-grafts used were as following: Excluder (n=3) or Zenith (n=1). All patients were followed-up with CT-angiography and chest X-rays 1, 4, 12 months after the procedure, and once per year thereafter. RESULTS: Stent-graft deployment was technically successful in all cases. Intraoperative mortality was not observed. Mean procedure time was 94+/-34 min (range, 70-145). Early postoperative complications occurred in one patient that developed acute renal failure but dialysis was not required. Mean hospitalisation was 8+/-5 days (range, 4-15). Late death occurred in one patient for an undetected ruptured thoracic type 1 endoleak. All three survivors are currently well 16.5 months (range, 3-36) after surgery. No neurological complications developed. CONCLUSION: Simultaneous abdominal and thoracic endovascular repair for multilevel aortic disease is feasible and could be a viable alternative in high-risk patients, who otherwise may not be suitable candidates for conventional repair.     

Aortic prosthetic ring annuloplasty: a useful adjunct to a standardized aortic valve-sparing procedure?

OBJECTIVE: Dilation of aortic annulus, sinuses of Valsalva, and sinotubular junction (STJ) diameters are the characteristic lesions of aortic root aneurysm. The remodeling technique reduces STJ diameter and creates three neosinuses of Valsalva. Alternatively, the reimplantation technique reduces both annulus and STJ diameters to the detriment of aortic root dynamics. Although the remodeling technique is recognized as the most physiological valve-sparing procedure, aortic annulus dilation may jeopardize its results. A standardized approach that combines an external subvalvular aortic prosthetic ring annuloplasty with the remodeling technique is suggested. METHODS: Eighty-three patients underwent an elective aortic root remodeling procedure, either isolated (group 1, n=34) or combined with an external subvalvular aortic prosthetic ring annuloplasty (group 2, n=49). Preoperative aortic regurgitation was 1.59+/-1.1 (group 1) and 1.97+/-1.3 (group 2) (NS). The aortic annulus was more dilated in group 2 than in group 1 (27+/-2.77 mm vs 26.4+/-2.3 mm, p<0.01). Residual aortic regurgitation > or =grade II was the conversion criteria for aortic valve replacement. RESULTS: Operative mortality was 3.6% (n=3). Intraoperative conversion for valve replacement was 32.7% in group 1 (n=11) versus 4.2% in group 2 (n=2) (p<0.001). In group 1, preoperative annulus diameter was larger for converted than for valve-spared patients (27.6+/-1.7 mm vs 25.2+/-1.5 mm, p<0.02). In group 2, implanted aortic ring significantly reduced annulus diameter (20.6+/-1.8 mm) without significant aortic valve gradient (8.3+/-3 mmHg). Follow-up was 17.2+/-13.4 months (group 1) and 10.41+/-7.95 months (group 2). Reoperation for recurrent aortic regurgitation was 13% in group 1 (n=3) versus 4.2% in group 2 (n=2). Echocardiographic follow-up found residual aortic regurgitation < or =grade I in 17 patients in group 1 (90%) versus 43 patients in group 2 (95.5%) and of grade II in two patients in group 1 (10%) and two patients in group 2 (4.5%). CONCLUSION: The addition of external aortic prosthetic ring annuloplasty improves the remodeling technique's operative reproducibility and short-term results. Therefore, its use as a systematical adjunct to the remodeling procedure is suggested. However, further long-term evaluation comparing this valve-sparing procedure to composite graft replacement should define the best surgical strategy for aortic root aneurysm.