Comparison of Partial Upper Sternotomy Versus Median Sternotomy for Total Arch Replacement in Patients With Type A Aortic Dissection

Abstract

Comparative studies of median sternotomy and partial upper sternotomy in total arch replacement for type A aortic dissection are rare, and the safety and benefits of partial upper sternotomy need further evaluation. This study aimed to explore the effectiveness and prognosis of partial upper sternotomy in total arch replacement among patients with type A aortic dissection. This is a retrospective study of patients who underwent total arch replacement for type A aortic dissection at the First Medical Center of Chinese People’s Liberation Army General Hospital between January 2016 and December 2019. They were grouped into the median sternotomy and partial upper sternotomy groups according to the different treatment methodologies. The intra-operative and prognostic indicators were compared between both groups. Forty-nine patients were included: 31 in the median sternotomy group and 18 in the partial upper sternotomy group. The partial upper sternotomy group had a shorter incision ((9.0 ± 0.8) cm vs. (25.5 ± 1.3) cm, P = 0.02) and smaller postoperative total drainage volume (885 mL vs. 1,820 mL, P = 0.03) than the median sternotomy group. The differences between the 2 groups with respect to other intra-operative indicators such as operation duration, cardiopulmonary bypass duration, aortic occlusion duration, hypothermic circulatory arrest duration, and intra-operative blood loss, and prognostic indicators such as red blood cell infusion, ventilator aid duration, cardiac intensive care unit stay, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complications were not significantly different (all P > 0.05). The utilization of partial upper sternotomy in patients with type A aortic dissection resulted in a smaller incision and more aesthetically pleasing scar, along with reduced drainage volume compared to median sternotomy.