Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Thick-patch pulmonary homograft, autologous pericardium and CardioCel Neo are common patch materials for aortic arch reconstruction. Insufficient data exist on sutured patch strength and limits of use. We evaluated failure strength of these materials to develop a failure prediction model for clinical guidance. METHODS: Patch failure strength was evaluated via sutured uniaxial and burst pressure testing. In sutured uniaxial testing, patches were sutured to aortic or Dacron tabs and pulled to failure. In burst pressure testing, patches were sewn into porcine aortas or Dacron grafts and pressurized to failure. Failure membrane tension was calculated. A prediction model of membrane tension versus vessel diameter was generated to guide clinical patch selection. RESULTS: Combining sutured uniaxial and burst pressure test data, pulmonary homograft failure strength {0.61 [interquartile range (IQR): 0.44, 0.78] N/mm, n = 21} was less than half that of autologous pericardium [2.22 (IQR: 1.65, 2.78) N/mm, n = 15] and CardioCel Neo [1.31 (IQR: 1.20, 1.42) N/mm, n = 20]. Pulmonary homograft burst pressure [245 (IQR: 202, 343) mmHg, n = 7] was significantly lower than autologous pericardium [863 (IQR: 802, 919) mmHg, n = 6] and CardioCel Neo [766 (IQR: 721, 833) mmHg, n = 6]. Our model predicts failure limits for each patch material and outlines safety margins for combinations of aortic diameter and pressure. CONCLUSIONS: Sutured failure strength of thick-patch pulmonary homograft was significantly lower than autologous pericardium and CardioCel Neo. Patient selection (predicted postoperative arch diameter and haemodynamics) and blood pressure management must be considered when choosing patch material for arch reconstruction. In older children and adolescents, autologous or bovine pericardium may be more suitable materials for aortic patch augmentation to minimize the risk of postoperative patch failure.