Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T23:09:35.685Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Left arm structure and function late after subclavian flap repair of aortic coarctation in childhood

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 June 2019

Mark R. Dennis Open the ORCID record for Mark R. Dennis [Opens in a new window] ,
Anne Cusick ,
Jacinta Borilovic ,
Calum Nicholson ,
Tanya Derwin ,
Rajesh Puranik  and
David S. Celermajer
Mark R. Dennis
Affiliation:
The University of Sydney, Sydney Medical School, NSW 2006, Australia Department of Cardiology, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Missenden Road, Camperdown 2050, Australia Specialist MRI, Newtown, Sydney 2050, Australia
Anne Cusick
Affiliation:
The University of Sydney, Discipline of Occupational Therapy, NSW 2006, Australia
Jacinta Borilovic
Affiliation:
The University of Sydney, Discipline of Occupational Therapy, NSW 2006, Australia
Calum Nicholson
Affiliation:
Department of Cardiology, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Missenden Road, Camperdown 2050, Australia Heart Research Institute, Sydney, 2006, Australia
Tanya Derwin
Affiliation:
Specialist MRI, Newtown, Sydney 2050, Australia
Rajesh Puranik
Affiliation:
The University of Sydney, Sydney Medical School, NSW 2006, Australia Department of Cardiology, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Missenden Road, Camperdown 2050, Australia Specialist MRI, Newtown, Sydney 2050, Australia
David S. Celermajer*
Affiliation:
The University of Sydney, Sydney Medical School, NSW 2006, Australia Department of Cardiology, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Missenden Road, Camperdown 2050, Australia Heart Research Institute, Sydney, 2006, Australia
*
Author for correspondence: Professor David Celermajer, Cardiology Department, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Missenden Road, Camperdown, NSW, 2050, Australia. Tel: 61-2-9515 6111; Fax: 61-2-9519 4938; E-mail: david.celermajer@health.nsw.gov.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives:

Concerns exist over the long-term consequences of subclavian artery ligation in subclavian flap repair for coarctation of the aorta. We sought to analyse upper limb structural and functional performance in adults who have had surgery in childhood for coarctation of the aorta, using either subclavian flap repair or end to end aortic anastomosis.

Methods:

Two-group observational design using anatomical and upper limb functional performance measures. Purposive sampling from our specialist adult congenital heart disease database of patients who received subclavian flap repair or end to end anastomosis for coarctation of the aorta as children. Upper limb measurements were completed using MRI and blood flow velocity with ultrasound imaging. Bilateral standardised upper limb functional testing of assessment of strength, dexterity and a standardised self-report of upper limb disability was completed.

Results:

Eighteen right-handed patients, 9 with subclavian repair, (38 ± 12 years, 78% males) were studied. Age at repair was 4.7 ± 5.9 years; mean time from initial repair 32 ± 9 years. The subclavian group had a larger difference between right and left when compared the end to end anastomosis group in: lower arm muscle mass (94.5 ± 42.3 mls versus 37.8 ± 94.5 mls, p = 0.008), lower arm maximal cross-sectional area, (5.9 ± 2.8 cm2 versus 2.9 ± 2.6 cm2, p = 0.038) and grip strength (14.7 ± 8.3 lbs versus 5.9 ± 5.3 lbs, p = 0.016) There were no significant functional differences between groups.

Conclusions:

In adults with repaired coarctation of the aorta, those with subclavian flap repair had a greater right to left arm muscle mass and grip strength differential when compared to those with end to end anastomosis repair.

Keywords

CHDmuscle massgrip strengthfunction
Type
Original Article
Information
Cardiology in the Young , Volume 29 , Issue 7 , July 2019 , pp. 856 - 861
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, EE, Davidson, WR Jr., Swallow, NA, et al. Long-term results of the subclavian flap repair for coarctation of the aorta in infants. World J Pediatr Congenit Heart Surg 2013; 4: 13–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pandey, R, Jackson, M, Ajab, S, Gladman, G, Pozzi, M. Subclavian flap repair: review of 399 patients at median follow-up of fourteen years. Ann Thorac Surg 2006; 81: 1420–1428.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
St Louis, JD, Harvey, BA, Menk, JS, O’Brien, JE Jr., Kochilas, LK. Mortality and operative management for patients undergoing repair of coarctation of the aorta: a retrospective review of the pediatric cardiac care consortium. World J Pediatr Congenit Heart Surg 2015; 6: 431–437.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, M, Fuster, V, Steele, PM, Driscoll, D, McGoon, DC. Coarctation of the aorta. Long-term follow-up and prediction of outcome after surgical correction. Circulation 1989; 80: 840–845.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waldhausen, JA, Petry, EL, Kurlander, GJ. Successful repair of subvalvular annular aneurysm of the left ventricle. N Engl J Med 1966; 275: 984–987.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barreiro, CJ, Ellison, TA, Williams, JA, et al. Subclavian flap aortoplasty: still a safe, reproducible, and effective treatment for infant coarctation. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2007; 31: 649–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shenberger, JS, Prophet, SA, Waldhausen, JA, Davidson, WR Jr., Sinoway, LI. Left subclavian flap aortoplasty for coarctation of the aorta: effects on forearm vascular function and growth. J Am Coll Cardiol 1989; 14: 953–959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kir, M, Ugurlu, B, Unal, N, et al. Revisiting subclavian flap repair for neonates and small infants. Pak J Med Sci 2015; 31: 131–135.Google ScholarPubMed
van Son, JA, van Asten, WN, van Lier, HJ, et al. Detrimental sequelae on the hemodynamics of the upper left limb after subclavian flap angioplasty in infancy. Circulation 1990; 81: 996–1004.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Abe, T, Loenneke, JP. Handgrip strength dominance is associated with difference in forearm muscle size. J Phys Ther Sci 2015; 27: 2147–2149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Skinner, M. Standards for data collection from human skeletal remains. Buikstra, Jane E., Ubelaker, Douglas H.. Q Rev Biol 1995; 70: 539–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corretti, MC, Anderson, TJ, Benjamin, EJ, et al. Guidelines for the ultrasound assessment of endothelial-dependent flow-mediated vasodilation of the brachial artery: a report of the International brachial artery reactivity task force. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002; 39: 257–265.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roberts, HC, Denison, HJ, Martin, HJ, et al. A review of the measurement of grip strength in clinical and epidemiological studies: towards a standardised approach. Age Ageing 2011; 40: 423–429.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kellor, M, Frost, J, Silberberg, N, Iversen, I, Cummings, R. Hand strength and dexterity. Am J Occup Ther 1971; 25: 77–83.Google ScholarPubMed
Oxford Grice, K, Vogel, KA, Le, V, et al. Adult norms for a commercially available Nine Hole Peg Test for finger dexterity. Am J Occup Ther 2003; 57: 570–573.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mathiowetz, V, Volland, G, Kashman, N, Weber, K. Adult norms for the Box and Block Test of manual dexterity. Am J Occup Ther 1985; 39: 386–391.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kontson, K, Marcus, I, Myklebust, B, Civillico, E. Targeted box and blocks test: normative data and comparison to standard tests. PLoS One 2017; 12: e0177965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tiffin, J, Asher, EJ. The Purdue pegboard; norms and studies of reliability and validity. J Appl Psychol 1948; 32: 234–247.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kennedy, CA, Beaton, DE, Smith, P, et al. Measurement properties of the QuickDASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) outcome measure and cross-cultural adaptations of the QuickDASH: a systematic review. Qual Life Res 2013; 22: 2509–2547.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Currarino, G, Engle, MA. The effects of ligation of the subclavian artery on the bones and soft tissues of the arms. J Pediatr 1965; 67: 808–811.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Skovranek, J, Goetzova, J, Samanek, M. Changes in muscle blood flow and development of the arm following the Blalock-Taussig anastomosis. Cardiology 1976; 61: 131–137.Google ScholarPubMed
Todd, PJ, Dangerfield, PH, Hamilton, DI, Wilkinson, JL. Late effects on the left upper limb of subclavian flap aortoplasty. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1983; 85: 678–681.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lodge, FA, Lamberti, JJ, Goodman, AH, et al. Vascular consequences of subclavian artery transection for the treatment of congenital heart disease. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1983; 86: 18–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, AM, Segel, N, Bishop, JM. Blalock-Taussig anastomosis for tetralogy of Fallot. A ten-to-fifteen year follow-up. Br Heart J 1964; 26: 266–267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Canniffe, C, Ou, P, Walsh, K, Bonnet, D, Celermajer, D. Hypertension after repair of aortic coarctation--a systematic review. Int J Cardiol 2013; 167: 2456–2461.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vigneswaran, TV, Sinha, MD, Valverde, I, Simpson, JM, Charakida, M. Hypertension in coarctation of the aorta: challenges in diagnosis in children. Pediatr Cardiol 2018; 39: 1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Dennis et al. supplementary material

Dennis et al. supplementary material 1

Download Dennis et al. supplementary material(File)
File 16.1 KB