Development of a diagnostic sensor for measuring blood cell concentrations during haemoconcentration

Comparison of two surgical approaches for acute type A aortic dissection: hybrid debranching versus total arch replacement

Background

The goal of this study was to determine the clinical outcomes of total arch replacement with frozen elephant trunk surgery and hybrid debranching surgery for acute type A aortic dissection patients.

Methods

From January 2017 to December 2019, the clinical data of acute type A aortic dissection patients were retrospectively collected and analyzed. There were 142 patients underwent total arch replacement with frozen elephant trunk surgery and 35 patients underwent hybrid debranching surgery.

Result

The age, the body mass index and the renal insufficiency of patients in the hybrid group were higher than those in the total arch replacement (TAR) group (all P < 0.01). The operation time, the cardiopulmonary bypass time and the aortic occlusion time of patients in the TAR group were significantly longer than those in the hybrid group (all P < 0.01). Patients in the debranching group had shorter ventilator-assisted breathing time, shorter postoperative hospital stay time and shorter intensive care unit (ICU) stay time. The incidence of pulmonary infection and transient neurological dysfunction were lower, and the transfusions of red blood cells and plasma during the perioperative period were smaller. The survival rates at 2 years were 91.9% and 85.9% in the TAR and hybrid groups, respectively.

Conclusion

Hybrid debranching operation is a safe and effective method for acute type A aortic dissection. Compared with TAR surgery, hybrid debranching surgery has the characteristics of less trauma, rapid recovery and lower incidence of complication.

Traditional and emerging technologies for washing and volume reducing blood products

Millions of blood components including red blood cells, platelets, and granulocytes are transfused each year in the United States. The transfusion of these blood products may be associated with adverse clinical outcomes in some patients due to residual proteins and other contaminants that accumulate in blood units during processing and storage. Blood products are, therefore, often washed in normal saline or other media to remove the contaminants and improve the quality of blood cells before transfusion. While there are numerous methods for washing and volume reducing blood components, a vast majority utilize centrifugation-based processing, such as manual centrifugation, open and closed cell processing systems, and cell salvage/autotransfusion devices. Although these technologies are widely employed with a relatively low risk to the average patient, there is evidence that centrifugation-based processing may be inadequate when transfusing to immunocompromised patients, neonatal and infant patients, or patients susceptible to transfusion-related allergic reactions. Cell separation and volume reduction techniques that employ centrifugation have been shown to damage blood cells, contributing to these adverse outcomes. The limitations and disadvantages of centrifugation-based processing have spurred the development of novel centrifugation-free methods for washing and volume reducing blood components, thereby causing significantly less damage to the cells. Some of these emerging technologies are already transforming niche applications, poised to enter mainstream blood cell processing in the not too distant future.