Aortic Reoperation Research Articles

Aortic tissue pathology in reoperative post-dissection repair following prior use of BioGlue.

The benefits of BioGlue as a surgical adjunct in aortic procedures have been demonstrated in several studies, but limited information is available regarding the associated histopathological findings of aortic tissue at the time of reoperation. The objective of this study was to assess, at reoperation, the histopathological characteristics of aortic tissue which has had BioGlue applied during a previous surgery. This prospective, single-center, single-arm study enrolled patients who were undergoing aortic reoperation and who had BioGlue used during previous aortic surgery. Histopathological assessment of aortic specimens obtained intraoperatively was performed on tissue that would have been removed independent of subject participation in the study. A total of 11 patients were enrolled and based on gross assessment, excessive amounts of BioGlue had been applied during the initial surgery in 36.4% of cases. The samples with the greatest amount of residual BioGlue demonstrated moderate to marked inflammatory responses, while the remaining samples demonstrated minimal to moderate inflammatory responses. Calcification of residual BioGlue was noted in 4 cases. Substantial medial degeneration was associated with suture line dehiscence in 4 cases, some of which had a large quantity of residual BioGlue. No evidence of suture degradation was observed. Cases with surgical anastomosis dehiscence were associated with substantial medial degeneration. While no histologic findings directly linked BioGlue to these degenerative changes, a contributory role cannot be excluded. Following the manufacturer's instructions for appropriate application of BioGlue is crucial to prevent potential complications.

BioGlue® is not associated with polypropylene suture breakage after aortic surgery.

ObjectiveWe have encountered broken or damaged polypropylene sutures (Prolene®) at the anastomotic sites during aortic reoperations. Because a surgical sealant, bovine serum albumin-glutaraldehyde (BioGlue®), was used in previous aortic surgery in some of these cases, we undertook this in vitro study to evaluate whether the use of BioGlue® was associated with breakage of polypropylene sutures at the aortic anastomosis.Materials and methodsThe broken polypropylene sutures, anastomotic sites and aortic tissue at the location of suture breakage were visually inspected and evaluated intraoperatively. Six human cadaveric aortic samples were incised circumferentially and anastomosed proximally to a valved conduit with running 4–0 polypropylene sutures (Prolene®). In the test group (n = 3), BioGlue® was applied directly to the Prolene® sutures at the anastomotic sites, while in the control group (n = 3) the anastomoses were not sealed with any surgical adhesive. The six samples were immersed in Dulbecco's phosphate buffered saline solution and mounted on a M-6 Six Position Heart Valve Durability Testing System and tested up to 120 million cycles for a 2-year period. During and upon completion of the testing, the integrity of Prolene® sutures, the anastomosis and aortic tissues was regularly assessed by visual inspection.ResultsIntraoperative findings included a stretched and thin aortic wall (some with thrombus), a small cleft between the aortic tissue and the Dacron vascular graft. An excessive amount of BioGlue® was often found around the anastomosis, with cracking material, but no signs of mechanical damage were observed in these cases. Upon visual inspection during and after in vitro testing, there was no apparent damage to the polypropylene sutures on the interior or exterior of the aortic anastomoses in any of the samples. No difference was observed in the physical integrity of the polypropylene sutures at anastomotic lines, the anastomoses and aortic tissues between the test and control samples.ConclusionsThe results of this study suggest that the use of BioGlue® was not associated with breakage of the polypropylene sutures at the anastomotic sites after aortic dissection repair.

Risk Factor Analysis of Abdominal Aortic Enlargement after Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair Using Two-Stent Graft Implantation for Stanford Type B Aortic Dissection

To explore the risk factors of abdominal aortic enlargement (AAE) after thoracic endovascular aortic repair using two-stent graft implantation (TEVAR-TSI) for Stanford type B aortic dissection. The clinical and imaging data of patients who underwent TEVAR-TSI for Stanford type B aortic dissection in the First Affiliated Hospital of Hebei North University from January 2013 through September 2020 were retrospectively collected and analyzed. CT angiography (CTA) scans were performed before the procedure. Follow-up CTA scans were scheduled and performed in 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after the procedure and annually thereafter. The primary outcome was AAE. The risk factors of AAE after TEVAR-TSI were selected and survival analysis and multivariate logistic regression were conducted accordingly. A total of 146 patients were regularly followed up at our hospital, with the median followup time of the entire cohort being 48 months (ranging from 12 to 84 months). During the followup period after TEVAR-TSI, the incidence of AAE was 19.9% (29/146). A total of 29 patients developed AAE (the AAE group), while 117 patients did not develop AAE (the non-AAE group). There were a total of 27 deaths, including 13 in the non-AAE group versus 14 in the AAE group. Distal aortic reoperation was performed on 10 patients, including 4 in the non-AAE group versus 6 in the AAE group. The cumulative long-term survival and freedom from distal aortic reoperation of the non-AAE group were both significantly better those of the AAE group ( P<0.05). Logistic multivariate regression analysis showed that independent risk factors of AAE after TEVAR-TSI included the following, partial thrombosis of the false lumen (odds ratio [ OR]=4.090, 95% confidence interval [ CI]: 1.539-10.867, P=0.005), the longer cumulative diameter of residual intimal tear above the level of the lowest renal arteries ( OR=1.290, 95% CI: 1.164-1.429, P=0.000), and shorter cumulative diameter of residual intimal tear below the level of the lowest renal arteries ( OR=0.487, 95% CI: 0.270-0.878, P=0.017). The prognosis of patients who developed AAE after TEVAR-TSI was not good. During followup visits, as precautions against the development of AAE, close attention should be paid to partial thrombosis of the false lumen, cumulative diameter of residual intimal tear above the level of the lowest renal arteries, and cumulative diameter of residual intimal tear below the level of the lowest renal arteries.

Reoperations on the ascending aorta and aortic arch: A retrospective series of 453 patients

ObjectiveThe study objective was to analyze the outcomes of reoperative thoracic aortic surgery at our institution from January 1986 to December 2018 to identify specific risk factors for early and late mortality. MethodsTwo groups of patients were identified: aortic root or ascending aorta repair (group 1: proximal repair, 218 patients, 48%) and arch surgery or descending thoracic aorta repair (group 2: distal repair, 235 patients, 52%). Primary end points were 30-day mortality, 10-year survival, and freedom from aortic reoperations. ResultsThe 30-day mortality (6.4% vs 8.1%) and in-hospital mortality (8.3% vs 11.9%) were similar (P > .05) in the 2 groups. Multivariable analysis identified female gender (odds ratio, 8.60, P < .01), endocarditis (odds ratio, 2.96, P = .04), and cardiopulmonary bypass time (odds ratio, 1.02, P < .01) as risk factors for 30-day mortality. Mean follow-up time was 163 months (confidence interval, 147-179). Long-term survival at 1, 5, and 10 years was 91.2%, 79.4%, and 66.3% in the proximal repair group and 80.7%, 68.8%, the and 55.3% in distal repair group, respectively (P = .03). According to the indication, 1-, 5-, and 10-year survivals were 92.1%, 82.3%, and 68.8% in degenerative aneurysms; 82.7%, 72.4%, and 56.3% in residual dissections; 80.9%, 65.4%, and 50.3% in endocarditis and pseudoaneurysms; 69.2%, 52.7%, and 42.2% in acute type A aortic dissections, respectively (P < .01). Competing risk analysis showed a significantly different cumulative incidence of reoperation at 1, 5, and 10 years between the 2 groups: 0.50%, 0.50%, and 0.90%, respectively, for the proximal repair group, and 0.40%, 4.30%, and 7.70%, respectively, the for distal repair group (P < .01). ConclusionsIn our experience, short- and long-term results of reoperative thoracic aortic surgery were satisfactory in chronic aneurysms but poor in aortic dissections, pseudoaneurysms, and active endocarditis. Reoperative aortic surgery carries a high risk, regardless of the anatomic extension of the procedure.

Long-term durability of a reimplantationvalve-sparing aortic root replacement can be expected in both Marfan syndrome and Loeys-Dietz syndrome.

The goal of this study was to evaluate the surgical outcomes of a valve-sparing root replacement using the reimplantation technique for annuloaortic ectasia in patients with Marfan syndrome (MFS) and in those with Loeys-Dietz syndrome (LDS). We reviewed 103 patients with MSF with mutations in the fibrillin-1 gene and 28 patients with LDS with mutations in the transforming growth factor-beta receptor and 2, SMAD3 and transforming growth factor beta-2 from 1988 to 2020. Forty-four (42.7%) patients with MFS [26 men, 31 (7.6) years] and 10 (35.7%) patients with Loeys-Dietz syndrome (LDS) [7 men, 22 (standard deviation: 8.6) years] who had no aortic dissection and underwent valve-sparing root replacement were included. The preoperative sinus diameter [46 (45-50.5) mm in those with MFS vs 48 (47-50) mm in those with LDS, p = 0.420] and the percentage of aortic insufficiency > grade 2+ [31.8% (10/44) in patients with MFS vs 10.0% (1/10) in those with LDS, p = 0.667] revealed no significant differences between the 2 groups. The cumulative incidences of aortic insufficiency greater than grade 1 (p = 0.588) and aortic valve reoperation (p = 0.310) were comparable between the 2 groups. Patients with LDS had a higher tendency towards aortic dissection after the initial operation (p = 0.061) and a significantly higher cumulative incidence of aortic reoperation (p = 0.003) versus those with MFS. Patients with MFS and those with LDS showed similar cumulative incidences of recurrent aortic valve insufficiency and aortic valve reoperation. Those with LDS revealed a higher cumulative incidence of aortic reoperation and a greater tendency towards aortic dissection after the initial operation compared with those with MFS.

A Clinical Analysis of Thirty-Five Patients Undergoing Aortic Reoperation.

IntroductionAt present, there are few reports regarding the issue of aortic reoperation due to its complexity and high risk and individual differences among patients.MethodsFrom November 2016 to December 2017, the data from 35 cases of aortic reoperation at our institution, out of 212 consecutive aortic repairs, were reviewed. We retrospectively summarized and analyzed their surgical indications, operative data, time interval from previous aortic repair, and outcomes. The time intervals until reoperation were analyzed for differences.ResultsPatients’ mean age was 40.9±14.5 years, and 25 of them were men (71.4%). The indications for reoperation were aortic valvular problem (14.3%), aneurysmal dilatation (25.7%), pseudoaneurysm formation due to anastomotic leakage (43.2%), and aortic dissection (17.1%). For patients who had underwent primarily emergency operations due to aortic dissection, the time interval until reoperation (4.8±3.2 years) was significantly shorter than that of the whole group (5.5±3.6 years, P<0.01). Among the 35 reoperations, Sun’s procedure was selected for 16 patients (45.7%) with total aortic arch reconstruction. The average follow-up was 12 months (range 9-15 months). Hospital mortality was 5.7% (two patients). Among the hospital survivors there were no cases of death, rupture of residual dissection, paraplegia, or central nervous system complications during the follow-up period.ConclusionPatients with acute aortic dissection required repeat surgery significantly earlier compared to other diseases. As to reoperation strategy, we recommend Sun’s procedure as the choice for extended arch reconstruction since minimal effect on overall mortality and complication rates were found.

The David procedure after the Ross operation: case series

Pulmonary autograft in the aortic position provides high survival rate and quality of life for patients, low incidence of valve-related complications, and excellent hemodynamic characteristics both in the early and long-term period. However, in some patients in the long-term period, pulmonary autograft may dilate, which in turn is one of the reasons for reoperations. In patients who require surgery for annuloaortic ectasia with aortic valve (AV) regurgitation or aortic root aneurysm (or both) with normal AV leaflets, David procedure is considered.Aim. To analyze results of David procedure after a prior Ross operation.Material and methods. From April 2009 to December 2020, 212 Ross operations were performed on patients 18 years of age and older. The median age of the operated patients was 34 (27-45) years. In the long-term period, 10 (4,7%) patients required a second AV operation and 7 (3,3%) of them required another intervention on the ascending aorta due to aortic dilatation. Four out of 10 patients underwent David procedure. The follow-up period for patients after David procedure ranged from 2 to 84 months.Results. The age of patients ranged from 23 to 45 years. Three patients had hypertension. The follow-up period from Ross's operation to David's one was 26 to 140 months. All patients had enlarged aortic annulus from 27 to 30 mm. The duration of myocardial ischemia ranged from 87 to 142 minutes, while the duration of artificial circulation — from 119 to 165 minutes. The graft diameter was 30 mm in two patients and 32 mm in the remaining ones. The length of stay in intensive care unit ranged from 16 to 23 hours. In the early postoperative period, no one had following postoperative complications: acute renal failure requiring hemodialysis, perioperative myocardial injury, stroke, sternal infection, respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation for ≥24 hours, resternotomy for bleeding and tamponade. In addition, there were no in hospital deaths. All patients had no aortic regurgitation at the time of discharge. All patients are alive and there were no reoperations. In one patient, in the long-term period, there was a mild aortic regurgitation, while in three patients — there is no regurgitation.Conclusion. The presented case series show that David procedure can be performed safely and effectively in a significant number of patients requiring a second autograft surgery due to neosinus dilatation. In the medium term, the David procedure has shown good outcomes in these patients with 100% survival and no aortic regurgitation and reoperation.

Long-term outcomes after ascending aortic replacement and aortic root replacement for type A aortic dissection.

OBJECTIVESWe investigated whether the selective use of supracoronary ascending aorta replacement achieves late outcomes comparable to those of aortic root replacement for acute Stanford type A aortic dissection (TAAD).METHODSPatients who underwent surgery for acute type A aortic dissection from 2005 to 2018 at the Helsinki University Hospital, Finland, were included in this analysis. Late mortality was evaluated with the Kaplan–Meier method and proximal aortic reoperation, i.e. operation on the aortic root or aortic valve, with the competing risk method.RESULTSOut of 309 patients, 216 underwent supracoronary ascending aortic replacement and 93 had aortic root replacement. At 10 years, mortality was 33.8% after aortic root replacement and 35.2% after ascending aortic replacement (P = 0.806, adjusted hazard ratio 1.25, 95% confidence interval, 0.77–2.02), and the cumulative incidence of proximal aortic reoperation was 6.0% in the aortic root replacement group and 6.2% in the ascending aortic replacement group (P = 0.65; adjusted subdistributional hazard ratio 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.15–1.89). Among 71 propensity score matched pairs, 10-year survival was 34.4% after aortic root replacement and 36.2% after ascending aortic replacement surgery (P = 0.70). Cumulative incidence of proximal aortic reoperation was 7.0% after aortic root replacement and 13.0% after ascending aortic replacement surgery (P = 0.22). Among 102 patients with complete imaging data [mean follow-up, 4.7 (3.2) years], the estimated growth rate of the aortic root diameter was 0.22 mm/year, that of its area 7.19 mm2/year and that of its perimeter 0.43 mm/year.CONCLUSIONSWhen stringent selection criteria were used to determine the extent of proximal aortic reconstruction, aortic root replacement and ascending aortic replacement for type A aortic dissection achieved comparable clinical outcomes.

Limited Distal Repair Results in Low Rates of Distal Events Following Surgery for Acute Type A Aortic Dissection

To investigate mortality and reoperation rates following limited distal repair after acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) at a single medium volume institution. We analyzed all patients that underwent limited distal repair (ascending aortic or hemiarch replacement) following ATAAD between January 1998 and April 2020 at our institution. During the study period, 489 patients underwent ATAAD surgery, of which 457 (94%) underwent limited distal repair with a 30-day mortality of 12.9%. Among 30-day survivors, late follow-up was 97.7% complete with a mean follow-up of 6.0 ± 5.5 years. In all, 50 patients (11%) required a reoperation during the study period at a mean of 3.4 ± 3.4 years after initial repair, with a 30-day mortality of 12%. An aortic reoperation was required in 4.1 (2.0-6.1)%, 10.3 (7.1-13.6)%, 15.1 (10.9-19.4)%, and 18.0 (13.0-22.9)% of patients at 1, 5, 10, and 15 years. A distal reoperation was required in 3.0 (1.2-4.7)%, 8.0 (5.1-10.9)%, 10.3 (6.8-13.8)%, and 12.4 (8.2-16.5)% of patients and 4.4 (2.3-6.4)%, 10.4 (7.1-13.7)%, 13.9 (9.8-18.0)%, and 16.9 (12.0-21.9)% of patents had a distal event at 1, 5, 10, and 15 years, respectively. Limited distal repair with an ascending aortic or hemiarch replacement was associated with acceptable survival and rates of reoperations and distal events. Limited distal repair is a safe and feasible standard approach to ATAAD surgery at a medium-volume center.

Outcome After Surgery for Acute Type A Aortic Dissection With or Without Primary Tear Resection

BackgroundThe outcome in patients after surgery for acute type A aortic dissection without replacement of the part of the aorta containing the primary tear is undefined. MethodsData of 1122 patients who underwent surgery for acute type A aortic dissection in 8 Nordic centers from January 2005 to December 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients with primary tear location unfound, unknown, not confirmed, or not recorded (n = 243, 21.7%) were excluded from the analysis. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to whether the aortic reconstruction encompassed the portion of the primary tear (tear resected [TR] group, n = 730) or not (tear not resected [TNR] group, n = 149). The restricted mean survival time ratios adjusted for patient characteristics and surgical details between the groups were calculated for all-cause mortality and aortic reoperation–free survival. The median follow-up time was 2.57 (interquartile range, 0.53-5.30) years. ResultsFor the majority of the patients in the TR group, the primary tear was located in the ascending aorta (83.6%). The reconstruction encompassed both the aortic root and the aortic arch in 7.4% in the TR group as compared with 0.7% in the TNR patients (P < .001). There were no significant differences in all-cause mortality (adjusted restricted mean survival time ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.12; P = .799) or reoperation-free survival (adjusted restricted mean survival time ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-1.02; P = .436) between the TR and TNR groups. ConclusionsPrimary tear resection alone does not determine the midterm outcome after surgery for acute type A aortic dissection.

Aortic valve replacement in pediatric patients: 30 years single center experience

BackgroundThe choice of aortic valve replacement needs to be decided in an interdisciplinary approach and together with the patients and their families regarding the need for re-operation and risks accompanying anticoagulation. We report long-term outcomes after different AVR options.MethodsA chart review of patients aged < 18 years at time of surgery, who had undergone AVR from May 1985 until April 2020 was conducted. Contraindications for Ross procedure, which is performed since 1991 at the center were reviewed in the observed non-Ross AVR cohort. The study endpoints were compared between the mechanical AVR and the biological AVR cohort.ResultsFrom May 1985 to April 2020 fifty-five patients received sixty AVRs: 33 mechanical AVRs and 27 biological AVRs. In over half of the fifty-three AVRs performed after 1991 (58.5%; 31/53) a contraindication for Ross procedure was present. Early mortality was 5% (3/60). All early deaths occurred in patients aged < 1 year at time of surgery. Two late deaths occurred and survival was 94.5% ± 3.1% at 10 years and 86.4% ± 6.2% at 30 years. Freedom from aortic valve re-operation was higher (p < 0.001) in the mechanical AVR than in the biological AVR cohort with 95.2% ± 4.6% and 33.6% ± 13.4% freedom from re-operation at 10 years respectively.ConclusionsRe-operation was less frequent in the mechanical AVR cohort than in the biological AVR cohort. For mechanical AVR, the risk for thromboembolic and bleeding events was considerable with a composite linearized event rate per valve-year of 3.2%.

Early outcome and mid-term survival after open arch repair using selective antegrade cerebral perfusion.

The introduction of selective antegrade cerebral perfusion technique as method of cerebral protection improved the outcome of open arch surgery. The aim of this study was to report early outcomes using this technique. Between 1997 and 2017, data were collected retrospectively for all patients who underwent surgical replacement of the aortic arch using selective antegrade cerebral perfusion (n = 938). To confirm the effectiveness of this cerebral protection method, early outcome and results were evaluated. The incidence of postoperative permanent neurological dysfunction was 6.4%. Overall hospital mortality was 11.9% (n = 112). On multivariable analysis, age >75 years, female gender, euroscore at increment of 1 point, chronic renal failure, extension of thoracic aorta replacement and CPB time emerged as independent risk factors for hospital mortality. The mid-term survival at 1, 5, 10 and 15 years was 92%, 78%, 60% and 49%, respectively. The competing risk analysis for permanent neurological dysfunction and aortic reoperations was performed excluding the patients who died during the hospital stay. The cumulative incidence of permanent neurological dysfunction and aortic reoperations was 2% at 3 years, 3% at 5 years, 6% at 10 years, 12% at 3 years, 15% at 5 years and 19% at 10 years, respectively. From the early 90s to the present day, the selective antegrade cerebral perfusion has confirmed to be a useful and "safe" method of brain protection in aortic arch surgery in terms of postoperative neurological complications.

Suture reduction of the borderline ascending aortic dilatation during aortic valve replacement.

This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of simple suture reduction of the ascending aorta (SRA) performed with aortic valve replacement (AVR) in patients with borderline ascending aortic dilatation (45-50 mm). Ninety-eight patients (ascending aortic diameter 47.7±3.4 mm) who underwent concomitant SRA with AVR were enrolled. Median follow-up duration was 83 (IQR 27-173) months. Computed tomographic angiography (CTA) follow-up was performed at 71 (47-149) months after surgery (N.=69). At least two CTA scans were performed in 34 patients (interval = 63 [46, 156] months). Early and long-term outcomes were evaluated, and dilatation rate (mm/year) of the repaired aorta was analyzed. Major adverse aortic events (MAEs) were defined as death related to aortic events, including sudden death, aortic rupture or dissection, aortic reoperation and recurrent aortic aneurysm (>45 mm). Early mortality rate was 2.0%. No patients had postoperative complications associated with SRA. A recurrent aortic aneurysm (>45 mm) was found in nine patients, but none of the patients had an ascending aorta diameter >50 mm. A multivariable analysis demonstrated that neither preoperative diameter of the ascending aorta nor bicuspid valve was associated with dilatation of the repaired aorta. Co-existing coronary artery disease was associated with both recurrent aneurysm and increased dilatation rate after SRA. There were two cases of sudden death and no one suffered from aortic dissection, rupture or aortic reoperation. Ten- and 20-year freedom rates from MAE were 90.3% and 79.3%, respectively. Concomitant SRA might be a safe and effective surgical alternative to ascending aorta replacement in AVR patients with borderline ascending aortic dilatation regardless of aortic valve pathology.

Fate of Preserved Aortic Root Following Acute Type A Aortic Dissection Repair

We examined the long-term fate of the preserved aortic root after emergent repair of acute Type A aortic dissection. 144 patients (60% males, mean age 60.5 years) underwent supracoronary ascending aortic replacement for acute Type A aortic dissection. Long-term survival, as well as growth, reoperation, and adverse events of the aortic root (rupture, pseudoaneurysm, and persistent dissection) were retrospectively assessed. Operative mortality was 9%, and overall survival at 1, 5, and 10 years was 87.8%, 76.4%, and 64.6%, respectively. Reoperation on the proximal aorta was performed in 16 patients (12.2%) within a median of 2.45 years post-operatively. Indications were severe aortic insufficiency (AI) (n = 6), aortic root pseudoaneurysm (n = 8), pseudoaneurysm with severe AI (n = 1), and persistent dissection with severe AI (n = 1). The aortic root grew at 0.2mm/year (interquartile range 0-0.8). Among survivors (n = 131), 28 patients (21.3%) reached aortic root diameter ≥ 45 mm (mean diameter 47.6 mm, range 45-54 mm). Survival free from proximal aortic reoperation at 1, 5, and 10 years was 96.6%, 94.5%, and 92.2%, respectively. No non-reoperated patient-despite persistent, unoperated enlargement or distortion or pseudoaneurysm of the aortic root-developed free rupture or fistula to a cardiac chamber. Root-sparing ascending aortic replacement for acute Type-A aortic dissection showed satisfactory long-term outcomes with relatively low rates of re-intervention or serious aortic root adverse events despite dilatation and irregularity of aortic root contour. Dense adhesions from prior surgery, proximal aortic suture line, and Teflon felt seem to discourage free rupture or fistulization.

A multicenter study of emergency endovascular repair of the thoracic aorta: Indications and outcomes

ObjectiveEndovascular techniques have become an essential tool for the treatment of descending thoracic aortic disease (thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair [TEVAR]). The aim is to analyze the indications and outcomes of emergency TEVAR at national level in relation to elective surgery. Study design and scopeA retrospective multicenter registry of patients with descending thoracic aortic disease treated on an emergency basis using endovascular techniques between 2012–2016, in 11 clinical units. Patients, inclusion criteria1) Ruptured descending thoracic aortic aneurysms (RTAA); 2) Blunt traumatic thoracic aortic injury (TAI); and 3) Complicated acute type B aortic dissections (TBADc). Primary variablesPatient mortality, survival and reoperation rate. Secondary variablesDemographic data, cardiovascular risk factors, specific data by indication, technical resources and postoperative complications. ResultsA total of 135 urgent TEVARs were included (111 men, mean age 60.4 ± 16.3 years): 43 ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysms (31.9%), 54 type B dissections (40%) and 32 traumatic aortic injuries (23.7%), and other etiologies 4.4%. The overall mortality rate at 30 days was 18.5%, and proved higher in the RTAA group (27.9%). The mean actuarial survival rate was 67 ± 6% at 5 years. The postoperative stroke rate was 5.2%, and the paraplegia rate was 5.9%. Aortic reoperations proved necessary in 12 patients (9%). ConclusionsEmergency descending thoracic aortic diseases can be treated by endovascular techniques with optimal results and low morbidity and mortality — though the figures are slightly higher than in elective cases. This registry provides, for the first time, real information on the daily clinical practice of emergency TEVAR in Spain.

Improved Outcomes Following Reimplantation of the Aortic Valve Compared to Remodeling in Marfan Syndrome: A Propensity-matched Study

Objective: We sought to compare perioperative and late outcomes of patients with Marfan syndrome undergoing aortic valve sparing (AVS) root replacement using the reimplantation versus the remodeling technique. Methods: From 1988 to 2018, 194 patients with Marfan syndrome underwent AVS procedures in a single center. Of these, 24 who had remodeling AVS were matched to 44 who had reimplantation (1:2 matching). After matching, baseline characteristics were well balanced including: age, sex, NYHA III/IV, moderate or severe AI, acute aortic dissection, and year of operation. Outcomes included perioperative mortality and complications, as well as late survival, freedom from reoperation on the aortic valve, and probability of developing moderate or severe AI. Results: There was no in-hospital mortality, stroke, sepsis, myocardial infarction, or need for permanent pacemaker. Re-exploration was slightly lower in reimplantation patients (n=1 2% vs n=3 12% p=0.04) ICU length of stay was 2±1 day and similar between groups. Median follow up was 17.5 years (IQR: 11.8 - 20.4). Survival at 20 years was not different following remodeling vs reimplantation (71% vs 80% p=0.36). However, 20-year moderate to severe aortic insufficiency and reoperation were higher in remodeling patients (31% vs 16% p=0.01; and 18% vs 0% p=0.01). Conclusions: AVS operations have excellent long term survival and durability in Marfan syndrome. Reimplantation was associated with less early re-exploration and lower risk of late aortic insufficiency and reintervention at 20 years.

Reoperative Aortic Arch Surgery under Mild Systemic Hypothermia: Two-Center Experience.

Background The aim of the study was to assess the indications, surgical strategies, and outcomes after reoperative aortic arch surgery performed generally under mild hypothermia. Methods Ninety consecutive patients (60 males, mean age, 55 ± 16 years) underwent open reoperative aortic arch surgery after previous cardiac aortic surgery. The indications included chronic-progressive arch aneurysm (55.5%), chronic aortic dissection (17.8%), contained arch rupture (16.7%), and graft infection (10%). The reoperation was performed through a repeat sternotomy (96%) or clamshell thoracotomy (4%) using antegrade cerebral perfusion under mild systemic hypothermia (28.9 ± 2.5°C) in all except three patients. Results The surgery comprised hemiarch or total arch replacement in 41 (46%) and 49 (54%) patients, respectively. The distal extension included classic or frozen elephant trunk technique, each in 12 patients, and total descending aorta replacement in 4 patients. Operative mortality was 6 (6.7%) among all patients, with age identified as the only independent predictor of operative mortality ( p = 0.05). Permanent and transient neurologic deficits occurred in 1% and 9% of the patients, respectively. Estimated survival at 8 years was 59 ± 8% with advanced heart failure predictive for late mortality ( p = 0.014). Freedom from second reoperation or intervention on the aorta was 78 ± 6% at 8 years, with most of these events occurring downstream in patients with chronic degenerative aneurysms. Conclusion Aortic arch reoperations performed using antegrade cerebral perfusion under mild systemic hypothermia offer favorable operative outcomes with an exceptionally low rate of neurologic morbidity without any difference between hemiarch and complex arch procedures.

A Novel Sutureless Integrated Stented (SIS) Graft Prosthesis for Type A Aortic Dissection: A Pilot Study for a Prospective, Singer Arm, Multi-Center Clinical Trial

Background: Various kinds of surgical strategies and prostheses have been advocated to improve short-term and long-term outcomes in type A aortic dissection (TAAD). Large-extent repair of pathological aorta with satisfactory outcomes is hard to achieve. The aim of this study was to investigate effectiveness and safety of a novel Sutureless Integrated Stented (SIS) graft prosthesis on TAAD patients undergoing total arch replacement (TAR) combined with frozen elephant trunk (FET) surgeries. Methods: All patients admitted to Fuwai Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College were screened according to inclusion and exclusion criteria after signing written informed consent. Urgent or scheduled surgery was arranged for eligible patients. Before operation, candidate size of the SIS graft prosthesis was chosen comprehensively according to aortic diameter on different levels measured on aortic computed tomography angiography (CTA). During operation, final appropriate-sized SIS graft prosthesis was implanted under direct vision. The primary endpoint was operative mortality. Secondary endpoints included postoperative rate of stroke, spinal cord injury, unexpected aortic reoperation and so on. All variables related to this study were collected prospectively and classified into preoperative, intraoperative, postoperative and follow-up data. Discharged patients were contacted by telephone 1 month after surgery and were asked to return to hospital 3 months, 6 months and 12 months after surgery. Inquiry, physical examination, aortic computed tomography angiography (CTA) examinations and transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) were performed on the occasion of the return visit. Effectiveness and safety analyses were done in these patients. Findings: Between Aug 1 and Sep 3, 2020, 10 TAAD patients were enrolled in this study. The SIS graft prostheses were successfully implanted in all patients. The median (IQR) age was 56.50 (43.75, 66.75) years (range from 31 to 75), and 7 patients were male (70.0%). All patients were performed with ascending aorta replacement + TAR + FET. Concomitant procedure included Bentall procedure, David procedure, adventitial inversion technique and ascending aorta-femoral artery bypass. The median (IQR) operation time, CPB time and cross clamp time were 270.50 (218.50, 312.50), 110.00 (88.00, 125.75), 69.50 (51.25, 82.75) min, respectively. Of note, the median (IQR) CA time was 9.00 (8.00, 9.00) min (range from 4 to 12). The median (IQR) lowest nasopharynx temperature was 26.75 (25.98, 27.67) °C. The median (IQR) platelets transfusion was 1.00 (1.00, 1.00) U. The median (IQR) platelets transfusion was 0.00 (0.00, 0.00) U. The median (IQR) platelets transfusion was 0.00 (0.00, 0.00) mL. No patients died after surgery and no severe postoperative complications occurred. Follow-up was 100% completed. Survival rate at 1-year follow-up was 100%. No patients have ever experienced any major organ complication. Freedom from prosthesis related adverse events and aortic reintervention was both 100%. Interpretation: The SIS graft prosthesis could be implanted in a novel sutureless way, which simplified surgery procedure, reduced CA time and avoided DHCA. The preliminary clinical outcomes and follow-up outcomes were satisfactory and with 0 death, 0 severe complication and 0 reintervention until 1 year postoperatively, which demonstrated effectiveness and safety of this prosthesis. Large-sample size trial has been conducted to further identify our findings. Trial Registration: This study was registered with Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2000032264. Funding: Beijing Science and Technology Program (Z191100007619042), Capital Health Development and Scientific Research Foundation (2018-2-4035), CAMS Initiative for Innovative Medicine (2016-I2M-1-016), Special Subject Development Foundation of Fuwai Hospital (2015-FWTS01). Declaration of Interest: We declare no competing interests. Ethical Approval: This study was approved by Ethic Committee of Fuwai Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences.

Type A acute aortic dissection with ≥40-mm aortic root: results of conservative and replacement strategies at long-term follow-up.

We evaluated the long-term results of aortic root (AR) preservation and replacement in patients operated on for acute type A aortic dissection. Out of 302 patients discharged after repair of acute aortic dissection (1977-2019), 124 patients had an AR ≥40 mm, which was preserved in 84 (68%, group A) patients and replaced in 40 (32%, group B) patients. Group B patients were younger (mean age 57 ± 12 vs 62 ± 11 years, P = 0.07), with a mean AR of 47 vs 43 mm and ≥moderate aortic insufficiency in 65% vs 30%. Survival, causes of death and reoperations were analysed at mean follow-up of 9 ± 8 years (6 months to 40 years). Actuarial survival of discharged patients at 5, 10 and 15 years was 97% (0.89-0.99), 78% (0.67-0.90) and 75% (0.64-0.88) in group A, and 85% (0.71-0.95), 62% (0.44-0.78) and 57% (0.39-0.76) in group B (log-rank test P = 0.2). Nine patients in group A (7 patients for aortic insufficiency and dilatation of the root and 2 patients for pseudoaneurysm) and 1 patient of group B (pseudoaneurysm of the right coronary button) required proximal reoperation without deaths. At 5, 10 and 15 years, the cumulative incidence of proximal aortic reoperations was 5%, 9% and 25% in group A, and 0%, 3% and 3% in group B (P = 0.02). At multivariable analysis AR >45 mm [hazard ratio (HR) 6.8, P = 0.026] and age (HR 0.9, P = 0.016) were independently associated with proximal reoperation. AR preservation in acute type A dissection showed acceptable long-term outcomes. Nevertheless, a more aggressive approach appears a valid option, especially in patients with AR diameter >45 mm.

Ascending aortic aneurysm: propensity score matching analysis of hemiarch and non-hemiarch replacement

Aim. To compare the shortand medium-term outcomes of hemiarch and nonhemiarch replacement for ascending aortic aneurysm (AAA).Material and methods. The study included 151 patients with non-syndromic AAA who underwent an elective replacement. Patients were divided into two groups: group 1 (non-hemiarch, n=40) — standard ascending aortic replacement; group 2 (hemiarch, n=111) — ascending aortic replacement with the hemiarch anastomosis in conditions of moderate hypothermia and circulatory arrest with unilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion. To eliminate systematic differences between the compared groups, the propensity score matching (PSM) method was used.Results. Before PSM, there were no significant intergroup differences in the incidence of neurological complications, myocardial infarction, prolonged ventilation, or acute kidney injury. Bleeding-related reoperation rates and hospital mortality significantly differed between groups. After pseudo-randomization between the non-hemiarch and hemiarch groups, there were no significant differences in the incidence of neurological events, myocardial infarction, prolonged ventilation, reoperations for bleeding, acute renal injury, and hospital mortality. Median-term survival and freedom from aortic reoperations also did not show significant intergroup differences.Conclusion. Hemiarch replacement for AAA does not lead to an increase in the incidence of postoperative complications, as well as the risk of shortand mediumterm mortality compared with non-hemiarch.