|
|
||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2008;135:984-985
© 2008 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery
Editorial |
Department of Surgery and Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Received for publication October 17, 2007; accepted for publication October 25, 2007. * Address for reprints: Martin F. McKneally, MD, PhD, Department of Surgery and Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, 77 Forest Grove Dr, Toronto, ON M2K 1Z4, Canada. (Email: martin.mckneally@utoronto.ca).
| The first 20% of the full text of this article appears below. |
| See related article on page 1042.
|
In this issue, Mitsumasa Hata and his colleagues1
at the Nihon University in Tokyo report their experience with emergency surgical intervention in octogenarians with acute type A aortic dissection. They move us from a lively earlier discussion in the Journal, based on the Siena experience, of the medical factors salient to answering the question of whether we "should" be doing this2-6
to a deeper level of discourse about the quality of life of patients and their families after surgical treatment. "Because we surgeons looked after the patients in our outpatient clinic," Hata's group realized and reflected thoughtfully on some of the troubling unfavorable intermediate and long-term outcomes. Of 30 patients treated surgically, 4 died, 5 became bedridden because of cerebral damage or severe depression after surgical intervention and subsequently died during institutional care, and 13 died of various unrelated illnesses or injuries in late follow-up.
The 50 octogenarian patients "were divided into 2 groups, 31 underwent emergency surgery, 28 were treated conservatively because the patient or family refused surgery." Every surgeon will recognize the undescribed nuances of this sorting process, the shades of meaning presented to families that inclines them toward or away from consenting to surgical treatment. This is part of the burden of surgeons, who give their own informed consent to accept and endure the responsibility and consequences of these decisions.
Questions that begin with "should" signal the need for explicit discussion of ethics: the
Related Article
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2008 135: 1042-1046.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
R. S. Bonser, A. M. Ranasinghe, M. Loubani, J. D. Evans, N. M. A. Thalji, J. E. Bachet, T. P. Carrel, M. Czerny, R. Di Bartolomeo, M. Grabenwoger, et al. Evidence, Lack of Evidence, Controversy, and Debate in the Provision and Performance of the Surgery of Acute Type A Aortic Dissection J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., December 6, 2011; 58(24): 2455 - 2474. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Biancari, F. Vasques, V. Benenati, and T. Juvonen Contemporary results after surgical repair of type A aortic dissection in patients aged 80 years and older: a systematic review and meta-analysis Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, November 1, 2011; 40(5): 1058 - 1063. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. DeAnda, R. Volman, and B. D. Spiess Repair of Type A Dissection in a Jehovah's Witness With Prior Cardiac Operation Ann. Thorac. Surg., January 1, 2009; 87(1): 289 - 290. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ANN THORAC SURG | ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN | EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG |
| J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG | ICVTS | ALL CTSNet JOURNALS |