01.06.2013 Views

tıklayınız - Türk Pediatrik Kardiyoloji ve Kalp Cerrahisi Derneği

tıklayınız - Türk Pediatrik Kardiyoloji ve Kalp Cerrahisi Derneği

tıklayınız - Türk Pediatrik Kardiyoloji ve Kalp Cerrahisi Derneği

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Stage 2 Palliation<br />

Connection of the superior <strong>ve</strong>na cava to the pulmonary arteries eliminates the inherent<br />

inefficiency that is present following the stage 1 Norwood procedure. The circulation<br />

is inefficient following the stage 1 procedure because of recirculation of pulmonary<br />

<strong>ve</strong>nous return through the lungs. Because only systemic <strong>ve</strong>nous return passes through<br />

the pulmonary circulation following a bidirectional Glenn the volume loading of the<br />

<strong>ve</strong>ntricle is effecti<strong>ve</strong>ly eliminated.<br />

Timing<br />

Experience suggests that beyond 2.5 to 3 months the pulmonary resistance is<br />

sufficiently low to allow a successful second stage procedure but the postoperati<strong>ve</strong><br />

course tends to be smoother and more rapid if the second stage is deferred until 4 or 5<br />

months (1). There appears to be no advantage in delaying beyond 6 months. With a 5<br />

mm Sano shunt it is more likely that a child will ha<strong>ve</strong> an unacceptable le<strong>ve</strong>l of cyanosis<br />

e.g. saturation less than 70 to 75% by 2.5 to 3 months and will require an earlier second<br />

stage.<br />

Should supplementary pulmonary blood flow be left?<br />

The advantage of leaving supplementary pulmonary blood flow in addition to the<br />

bidirectional Glenn shunt is that this will permit perfusion of the lungs with the<br />

presumed hepatic factor which inhibits de<strong>ve</strong>lopment of pulmonary arterio<strong>ve</strong>nous<br />

malformations. Howe<strong>ve</strong>r from a technical perspecti<strong>ve</strong> there is insufficient room on the<br />

right pulmonary artery to accommodate both a modified right Blalock shunt and a<br />

bidirectional Glenn shunt. On the other hand it would be technically feasible to lea<strong>ve</strong><br />

a Sano shunt in conjunction with a bidirectional Glenn shunt.<br />

The principal argument against leaving supplementary pulmonary blood flow is that this<br />

additional blood flow is inherently inefficient. Furthermore it is difficult to quantitate<br />

the amount of supplementary blood flow so that there is a risk of o<strong>ve</strong>r volume loading<br />

the single right <strong>ve</strong>ntricle. Studies which ha<strong>ve</strong> compared patients with and without<br />

supplementary pulmonary blood flow suggest a higher incidence of pleural effusions,<br />

longer hospitalization and the suggestion of a higher mortality when additional blood<br />

flow is left (2).<br />

Technique of the Bidirectional Glenn Shunt<br />

Although it is feasible to undertake a bidirectional Glenn shunt without cardiopulmonary<br />

bypass using either no temporary shunt around the anastomosis or with a temporary<br />

shunt, ne<strong>ve</strong>rtheless it is our recommendation that the bidirectional Glenn shunt<br />

should be performed on cardiopulmonary bypass without aortic cross clamping. The<br />

cardiac end of the divided SVC is o<strong>ve</strong>rsewn and the cephalic end is anastomosed to<br />

a longitudinal arteriotomy on the superior surface of the proximal right pulmonary<br />

artery. The Sano shunt is taken down.<br />

63

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!