The use of intraoperative epiaortic ultrasonography in monitoring patients over 75 years old treated with aortic valve replacement.

Introduction: Epiaortic ultrasound scanning (EAS) extended the use of ultrasound to the intraoperative diagnosis of aortic pathology. Surgical palpation of the ascending aorta underestimates the presence and severity of atherosclerotic plaques. Epiaortic ultrasound scanning has been used as an adjunct to transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) or as a primary direct diagnostic tool for imaging the ascending aorta as well as the aortic arch, which gained prominence as part of a multipronged intraoperative strategy to reduce atherosclerotic emboli.
Aim: To compare the epiaortic examination with transthoracic and transesophageal echo (transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and TEE), X-ray, surgical intraoperative palpation, and postoperative neurological status.
Material and Methods: The analyzed group consisted of 35 patients (mean age: 81.3 years) treated with aortic valve replacement (AVR), either alone (60%) or combined with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG; 22.8%) or aortic aneurysm replacement (11.42%). In 2 patients, only CABG was performed because intraoperatively reevaluated strategy. Thierteen patients have got a history of diabetes, 10 chronic renal failure and 3 of cerebral stroke.
Results: In more than 80% of patients, positive EAS results had an influence on the choice of aortic clamping site and in 50% of patients on the site of cannulation. Female sex, peripheral vascular disease, history of previous stroke, and calcifications in the ascending aorta in TTE have significant predictive value for recognizing atherosclerotic changes in EAS and the risk of postoperative neurological complications in octogenarians treated with AVR.
Conclusions: Epiaortic ultrasound scanning imaging is superior to TTE and manual palpation in the detection and localization of ascending atherosclerosis. This technique should be introduced as a standard perioperative examination in older patients at risk of neurological complications.
Competing Interests: The authors report no conflict of interest.