目的总结左胸骨旁小切口微创封堵分流方向偏向流出道的室间隔缺损（VSD）的初步经验。 方法2014年2～8月广州医科大学附属第一医院对15例分流方向偏向流出道的VSD患者施行左胸骨旁小切口微创封堵手术，其中男7例，女8例；年龄10个月～19岁（4.5±4.6）岁；体重5.5～54.0（14.6±14.1）kg；其中干下型6例，嵴内型6例，膜周部型3例；缺损直径2.5～6.5（4.0±1.2）mm，距主动脉瓣环距离≤1 mm 9例，≤2 mm4例，>2 mm 2例；合并主动脉瓣右冠瓣轻度脱垂5例；采用左胸骨旁第2或第3肋间1.5～2.5 cm切口，在经食管超声心动图（TEE）监视下在右心室流出道表面选择适当的穿刺点，建立VSD输送轨道并置入封堵器，观察有无残余分流、主动脉瓣反流；术后3个月复查经胸超声心动图。 结果15例均成功封堵，无中转开胸，无残余分流和心律失常，新发主动脉瓣轻微反流2例，围手术期输血1例；手术时间30～120（58±28）min，术中出血量5～200（26±50）ml；术后住院时间3～13（4.3±2.6）d，无二次开胸止血、Ⅲ°房室传导阻滞、主动脉瓣反流加重、溶血、切口感染等并发症；术后3个月返院复查经胸超声心动图13例，无新发主动脉瓣反流和封堵器脱落；2例术中新发主动脉瓣反流加重，其中1例出现残余分流。 结论左胸骨旁小切口封堵分流方向偏向流出道VSD 手术安全、切口小、操作简单，近期效果尚满意；对合并主动脉瓣轻度脱垂VSD 需慎重施行外科微创封堵手术。
目的 总结经左胸骨旁途径封堵动脉导管未闭的经验和技术方法。 方法 回顾性分析2013年11月至2014年8月广州医科大学附属第一医院21例动脉导管未闭封堵手术患者的临床资料。其中，男8例、女13例，年龄2～20 （6.7±4.9）岁，体重9～40 （19.3±9.4） kg。取左胸骨旁第2肋间1.5～3 cm切口，在肺动脉主干前上壁缝荷包，在经食管超声心动图（TEE）实时监测引导下利用自制弯形中空探条引导钢丝通过动脉导管建立输送轨道，或将装有封堵伞的输送鞘直接通过动脉导管后释放封堵器。 结果 21例手术均成功完成，无中转开胸及输血，手术时间35～130 （65.2±28.4） min，出血量10～200 （47.8±60.8） ml，术后住院时间2～6 （3.4±1.3） d，术后无封堵器脱落、溶血、肺炎、心律失常、二次开胸、切口感染等并发症，出院前复查未见封堵伞移位、脱落，无明显胸腔积液及心包积液。 结论 经左胸骨旁途径封堵动脉导管未闭安全、切口小、恢复快，为动脉导管未闭患者提供了一种治疗方案。
ObjectiveTo compare the effects of transthoracic device closure and traditional surgical repair on atrial septal defect systemically.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, VIP, CNKI, CBM, Wanfang Database up to July 31, 2018 to identify trials according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Quality was assessed and data of included articles were extracted. The meta-analysis was conducted by RevMan 5.3 and Stata 12.0 software.ResultsThirty studies were identified, including 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 27 cohort studies involving 3 321 patients. For success rate, the transthoracic closure group was lower than that in the surgical repair group (CCT, OR=0.34, 95%CI 0.16 to 0.69, P=0.003). There was no statistical difference in mortality between the two groups (CCT, OR=0.43, 95%CI 0.12 to 1.52, P=0.19). Postoperative complication occurred less frequently in the transthoracic closure group than that in the surgical repair group (RCT, OR=0.30, 95%CI 0.12 to 0.77, P=0.01; CCT, OR=0.27, 95%CI 0.17 to 0.42, P<0.000 01). The risk of postoperative arrhythmia in the transthoracic closure group was lower than that in the surgical repair group (CCT, OR=0.56, 95%CI 0.34 to 0.90, P=0.02). There was no statistical difference in the incidence of postoperative residual shunt in postoperative one month (CCT, OR=4.52, 95%CI 0.45 to 45.82, P=0.20) and in postoperative one year (CCT, OR=1.03, 95%CI 0.29 to 3.68, P=0.97) between the two groups. Although the duration of operation (RCT MD=–55.90, 95%CI –58.69 to –53.11, P<0.000 01; CCT MD=–71.68, 95%CI –79.70 to –63.66, P<0.000 01), hospital stay (CCT, MD=–3.31, 95%CI –4.16, –2.46, P<0.000 01) and ICU stay(CCT, MD=–10.15, 95%CI –14.38 to –5.91, P<0.000 01), mechanical ventilation (CCT, MD=–228.68, 95%CI –247.60 to –209.77, P<0.000 01) in the transthoracic closure group were lower than those in the traditional surgical repair group, the transthoracic closure costed more than traditional surgical repair during being in the hospital (CCT, MD=1 221.42, 95%CI 1 124.70 to 1 318.14, P<0.000 01).ConclusionCompared with traditional surgical repair, the transthoracic closure reduces the hospital stay, shortens the length of ICU stay and the duration of ventilator assisted ventilation, while has less postoperative complications. It is safe and reliable for patients with ASD within the scope of indication.