• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.38 no.7 s.252
• /
• pp.483-488
• /
• 2005

Aortic valve-sparing procedures could reduce valve-related morbidity, but may increase operative risks; therefore, these procedures could not be performed routinely. We attempted to find out the early results while focusing on the operative risks associated with these procedures in our hospital. Material and Method: From May 1996 to July 2003, 26 patients underwent these procedures including 15 patients with Marfan syndrome and 1 patient with Behcet disease. There were 17 men and 9 women with mean age of $37.9\pm19.2$ years (range: 6 months-74 years). Ten patients had ascending aortic dissection, 18 patients had more than moderate degree of aortic valve insufficiency (AI). Two types of valve-sparing procedures were performed: valve reimplantation in 14 and root remodeling in 12 patients. Associated procedures were performed as follows: aortic valve plasty in 6, mitral valve plasty in 5, hemi-arch replacement in 4, total arch replacement in 2, coronary artery bypass surgery in 1 and Maze procedure in 1 patient(s). Result: In four patients, valve-sparing procedures were converted to Bentall procedures during operation. Including these patients, there was no operative deaths, 3 patients underwent re-operation due to bleeding, 1 patient had permanent pacemaker. The median duration of ICU stay was 45.5 hours, the median duration of hospital stay was 10.5 days. In 22 patients excluding 4 converted patients, intraoperative transesophageal echocardiogram (TEE) showed less than mild degree of AI in all except one who had not received intra-operative TEE in the beginning and showed moderate degree of AI at discharge. The mean duration of follow-up was $21.2\pm27.4$ months. All patients were alive except one who died during other departmental surgery. In 3 patients, more than moderate degree of AI was recurred, but there were no reoperation. Conclusion: Aortic valve-sparing procedures could be performed relatively safely in selected patients who had annuloaortic ectasia.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.40 no.1 s.270
• /
• pp.37-44
• /
• 2007

Background: It is known that long-term survival rate in patients underwent bronchial sleeve lobectomy for primary lung cancer is at least equal to that in patients underwent pneumonectomy, and bronchial sleeve lobectomy is performed in patients with suitable tumor location even in patients have adequate pulmonary function. Sleeve pneumonectomy is performed when carina was invaded by tumor or tumor location was near to the carina. We performed this study to know our results of sleeve resection for primary lung cancer. Material and Method: We analyzed retrospectively the medical records of 45 patients who underwent sleeve lobectomy or sleeve pneumonectomy for primary lung cancer by one thoracic surgeon from May 1990 to July 2003 in Department of Thoracic & Cardiovascular Surgery, College of Medicine, Kyung Hee University. Follow-up loss was absent and last follow-up was performed in April 5, 2005. Kaplan-Meyer method and log-lank test were used to know long-term survival rate and p-value. Result: Mean age was 60 years old and male to female ratio 41:1. Histologic types were squamous cell carcinoma were 39, adenocarcinoma were 4, and others were 2 patients. Pathologic stages were I 14, II 14, and III 17 patients. Nodal stages were N0 23, N1 13, and N2 9 patients. Types of operation were sleeve lobectomy 40 and sleeve pneumonectomy 5 patients. Operative mortality was 3 patients and its cause was respiratory complications. Early complications were pneumonia 4, atelectasis 8, air leakage more than 7 days 6, and atrial fibrillation 4 patients. In 19 patients tumor was recurred. Local recurrence was 10 and systemic metastasis was 9 patients. Overall 5, 10-year survival rate were 54.2%, 42.5%. The 5, 10-year survival rates according to the pathologic stage were 83.9%, 67.1% in stage I, 55%, 47.1% in II, 33.3%, 25% in III, and significance difference was present between stage I and III. The 5, 10-year survival rate according to the lymph node involvement were 63.9%, 54.6% in N0, 53,8%, 46.5% in N1, 28.5%, 14.2% in N2, and significance difference was present between N0 and N2. Conclusion: Because bronchial sleeve lobectomy for primary lung cancer could be performed safely and shows acceptable long-term survival rate, it could be considered primary in case of suitable tumor location if complete resection is possible. Although sleeve pneumonectomy for primary lung cancer shows somewhat high operative mortality rate, it could be considered in view of curative treatment.