Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cerebral protection strategies have been investigated since the introduction of aortic arch surgery and have been modified over the centuries. However, the cerebral protective effects of unilateral and bilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion are similar, with opportunities for further improvement. METHODS: A total of 30 patients who underwent total arch surgery were enrolled in this study. Patients were assigned to the novel continuous whole-brain or unilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion group according to the cerebral perfusion technique used. Preoperative clinical data and 1-year postoperative follow-up data were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of the incidence of permanent neurological deficit, mortality, or therapeutic efficacy. However, the incidence of temporary neurological dysfunction in the novel whole-brain perfusion group was significantly lower than that in the unilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion group. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the branch-first approach with a novel whole-brain perfusion strategy had no obvious disadvantages compared with unilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion in terms of cerebral protection and surgical safety. These findings suggest that this new technique is feasible and has application value for total arch surgery.