Abstract：【Objective】 To investigate the clinical effect of robot repair of atrial septal defect in adult patients. 【Methods】 The clinical data of 110 patients with secondary atrial septal defect admitted to our hospital were retrospectively analyzed. According to the different treatment methods, they were divided into observation group (robot atrial septal defect repair, n=57) and control group (transcatheter closure, n=53). The operation time, hospital stay, postoperative blood transfusion rate and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups. The right atrial diameter (RA), right ventricular diameter (RV), left atrial diameter (LA) and left ventricular diameter (LV) were compared between the two groups before and 6 months after operation.【Results】 The operation time, hospital stay and postoperative blood transfusion in the observation group were significantly higher than those in the control group (P<0.05). 6 months after operation, RA and RV in observation group and control group were lower than those before operation, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05); LA and LV of two groups were not statistically significant (P>0.05); RA and RV of observation group were significantly lower than those of control group at 6 months after operation, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The incidence of postoperative complications in the observation group was 5.26% (3/57), which was lower than 24.53% (13/53) of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (χ2=8.200, P=0.004<0.05).【Conclusion】 Robot atrial septal defect repair plays an important role in the treatment of adult secondary atrial septal defect. It can significantly reduce postoperative RA and RV, and has high clinical safety.
[1] Naksuk N, Asirvatham SJ. Correction to: Iatrogenic atrial septal defect: reassurance or inquisitiveness[J].J Int Cardiac Electrophysiol,2018,35(7):90-94. [2] Hasco t S, Hadeed K, Karsenty C, et al. Feasibility, safety and accuracy of echocardiography-fluoroscopy imaging fusion during percutaneous atrial septal defect closure in children[J].J Am Society Echocard,2018,36(6):103-106. [3] 张阳春.小儿先天性房间隔或室间隔缺损在超声心动图引导下经食管或经胸介入封堵与外科经胸小切口封堵疗效差异[J].中国现代药物应用,2017,11(11):48-50. [4] 喻晓芬,王知非,洪敏. 达芬奇机器人手术系统的手术配合[J].中国微创外科杂志,2015,15(6):570-573. [5] Szirt R, Youssef GS.Acute right to left shunt-Combination of tricuspid valve endocarditis, Chiari network, and ostium secundum atrial septal defect[J].J Cardiol Cases,2017,16(5):151-153. [6] Truong QB, Dao AQ, Do NT, et al. Percutaneous atrial septal defect closure through femoral and transjugular approaches in patients with interrupted inferior vena cava[J].J Cardiol Cases,2018,18(3):106-109. [7] 李彬,张强,刘成霏,等. 房间隔缺损患者介入治疗前后右心功能变化[J].中国循证心血管医学杂志,2016,8(2):194-196. [8] 孙正旭.年龄≥60岁的房间隔缺损患者的介入封堵治疗[J].南京医科大学学报(自然科学版),2016,36(5):593-596. [9] 姜兆磊,梅举,汤敏,等. 经右胸微创外科治疗成人房间隔缺损合并心房颤动[J].中国胸心血管外科临床杂志,2018,25(2):133-137. [10] 李双磊,高长青. 机器人手术与传统开胸手术在心脏肿瘤患者治疗中的对比:倾向评分匹配分析[J].南方医科大学学报,2017,37(10):1296-1300. [11] 林德清.达芬奇手术机器人房间隔缺损修补术安全性分析[J].医疗卫生装备,2017,38(11):106-108. [12] 张伟. 达芬奇机器人手术系统——原理、系统组成及应用[J].中国医疗器械信息,2015,21(3):24-25.
2020, Vol. 37 
