Partial Anomalous Left Pulmonary Artery Anterior Versus Posterior Types: A Systematic Review

Carlos S. Restrepo, Tomas V. Gonzalez, Ameya J. Baxi, Sachin S. Saboo

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the features of partial anomalous left pulmonary artery (PALPA) and differences between cases with posterior versus anterior a nomalous vessels in relation to the tracheobronchial tree. We hypothesized that statistical significance was dependent on the course of the anomalous vessel due to airway compression in the posterior type. This study included cases obtained from the literature (n = 33) and an institution teaching file (n = 2). Information collected: age, sex, medical history, additional anomalies, anomalous vessel course, and respiratory symptoms. Data were analyzed with independent samples t-test and Fisher’s exact test. PALPAs were more commonly anterior than posterior. Mean age: 5.3 years (SD = 12.4) for anterior and 6.8 years (SD = 18.5) for posterior (p = 0.77). Respiratory symptoms: 20% of anterior and 60% of posterior cases (p = 0.032). Tracheobronchial anomalies: 35% of anterior and 60% of posterior cases (p = 0.182). Non-cardiac and non-tracheobronchial anomalies: 30% of anterior and 47% of posterior cases (p = 0.511). Kabuki syndrome: 25% of anterior and 6.7% of posterior cases (p = 0.207). In conclusion, respiratory symptoms were the only significant difference between anterior and posterior PALPA types.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1947-1958
Number of pages12
JournalTomography
Volume8
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2022

Keywords

  • congenital heart disease
  • duplicated left pulmonary artery
  • Kabuki syndrome
  • partial anomalous left pulmonary artery (PALPA)
  • pseudopulmonary artery sling

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Partial Anomalous Left Pulmonary Artery Anterior Versus Posterior Types: A Systematic Review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this