Aortic Root Replacement Research Articles

Decellularized aortic homografts versus mechanical composite grafts for aortic root replacement.

Mechanical composite valve grafts (MCVGs) are the first-line therapy for aortic root replacement in young adults. Decellularized aortic homografts (DAH) present a promising novel alternative due to their lower thrombogenicity. We aimed to compare both treatment options regarding survival and valve-related adverse events. This study was designed as a single-centre retrospective cohort study including patients who underwent root replacement with MCVG or DAH between 2000 and 2022. Urgent or emergent procedures were excluded. The study cohort included 289 patients (MCVG n = 216, DAH n = 73) with a mean age of 48.5 ± 12 years (MCVG 49 ± 12 years vs DAH 47 ± 11 years; P = 0.23) and a median EuroScore II of 1.7% (1.2, 2.6). The 30-day mortality was 1% (n = 3). Cumulative survival at 3 years was 99% for DAH and 94% for MCVG, respectively (P = 0.15). Mean follow-up was 98.9 ± 72.7 months. Bleeding events (n = 14, 6.5%) and thromboembolism (n = 14, 6.5%) were only observed in the MCVG group (P = 0.19 and 0.09, respectively). Four cases (5%) of moderate structural valve deterioration occurred, all in the DAH group (P ≤ 0.001). The cumulative incidence of a composite end point of valve-related adverse events was significantly higher in the MCVG group (P = 0.0295). Aortic root replacement with MCVGs and decellularized aortic homografts showed low mortality in an elective setting. Patients in the homograft cohort demonstrated significantly higher freedom from valve-related adverse events. DAH present a promising treatment option for young patients requiring root replacement; however, data on long-term durability are needed.

Homograft Aortic Root Replacement for Destructive Prosthetic Valve Endocarditis: Results in the Current Era.

Background: Destructive aortic prosthetic valve endocarditis portends a high morbidity and mortality, and requires complex high-risk surgery. Homograft root replacement is the most radical and biocompatible operation and, thus, the preferred option. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 61 consecutive patients who underwent a cardiac reoperation comprising homograft aortic root replacement since 2010. The probabilities of survival were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method, whereas multivariable regression served to outline the predictors of adverse events. The endpoints were operative/late death, perioperative low cardiac output and renal failure, and reoperations. Results: The operative (cumulative hospital and 30-day) mortality was 13%. The baseline aspartate transaminase (AST) and associated mitral procedures were predictive of operative death (p = 0.048, OR [95% CIs] = 1.03 [1-1.06]) and perioperative low cardiac output, respectively (p = 0.04, OR [95% CIs] = 21.3 [2.7-168.9] for valve replacement). The latter occurred in 12 (20%) patients, despite a normal ejection fraction. Survival estimates (±SE) at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 3 years after surgery were 86.3 ± 4.7%, 82.0 ± 4.9%, 75.2 ± 5.6, and 70.0 ± 6.3%, respectively. Survival was significantly lower in the case of AST ≥ 40 IU/L (p = 0.04) and aortic cross-clamp time ≥ 180 min (p = 0.01), but not when excluding operative survivors. Five patients required early (two out of the five, within 3 months) or late (three out of the five) reoperation. Conclusions: Homograft aortic root replacement for destructive prosthetic valve endocarditis can currently be performed with a near 90% operative survival and reasonable 3-year mortality and reoperation rate. AST might serve to additionally stratify the operative risk.

Reoperative aortic root replacement following previous cardiac surgery or type A aortic dissection repair

ObjectiveReoperative aortic root replacement (ARR) is a technically challenging procedure. This study assesses the influence of reoperation on outcomes following ARR, particularly after prior acute type A aortic dissection repair. MethodsOf the 1823 patients in this study, 1592 (87.3%) underwent primary ARR, and 231 (12.7%) underwent reoperative ARR. Within the reoperative ARR group, 69 patients (29.9%) had previous acute type A aortic dissection repair, and 162 patients (70.1%) underwent reoperative ARR for other indications. ResultsReoperative ARR patients exhibited higher rates of ischemic heart disease (13.9% vs 3%; P < .001), diabetes (10% vs 5.3%; P = .009), chronic pulmonary disease (9.1% vs 5%; P = .018), renal impairment (17.7% vs 5.3%; P < .001), and had lower ejection fraction (45.5% ± 8.1% vs 47.6% ± 7.9%; P < .001) compared with primary ARR. The overall operative mortality was 0.4%, with no significant difference between groups (0.9% vs 0.3%; P = .485). At multivariable analysis, previous operation was the most powerful predictor for major adverse events (odds ratio, 3.20; 95% CI, 2.12-4.79; P < .001). Reoperative ARR had a lower 10-year survival compared with primary ARR (67.4% vs 85.9%; log-rank P < .001). Multivariable analysis further confirmed that reoperation was significantly associated with 10-year mortality (hazard ratio, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.01-3.06; P = .044). Among the reoperative ARR group, operative mortality after previous acute type A aortic dissection repair was similar to that for other etiologies (0% vs 1.2%; P = .880). ConclusionsPatients undergoing reoperative ARR have more comorbidities and extensive aortic disease compared with those undergoing primary surgery. They face a 3.5-fold increased risk of major adverse events but no difference in operative mortality compared with primary ARR.

Impact of valve-sparing aortic root replacement on aortic fluid dynamics and biomechanics in patients with syndromic heritable thoracic aortic disease

Patients with syndromic heritable thoracic aortic diseases (sHTAD) who underwent prophylactic aortic root replacement are at high risk of distal aortic events, but the underlying mechanisms are poorly understood. This prospective, longitudinal study aims to assess the impact of valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) on aortic fluid dynamics and biomechanics in these patients, and to examine whether they present altered haemodynamics or biomechanics prior to surgery compared to sHTAD patients with no indication for surgery (sHTAD-NSx) and healthy volunteers (HV). Sixteen patients with Marfan or Loeys-Dietz syndrome underwent two 4D flow CMR studies before (sHTAD-preSx) and after VSARR (sHTAD-postSx). Two age, sex and BSA matched cohorts of 40 HV and 16 sHTAD-NSx patients with available 4D flow CMR, were selected for comparison. In-plane rotational flow (IRF), systolic flow reversal ratio (SFRR), wall shear stress (WSS), pulse wave velocity (PWV) and aortic strain were analysed in the ascending (AscAo) and descending aorta (DescAo). All patients with sHTAD presented altered haemodynamics and increased aortic stiffness (p<0.05) compared to HV, both in the AscAo (median PWV 7.4 in sHTAD-NSx; 6.8 in sHTAD-preSx; 4.9m/s in HV) and DescAo (median PWV 9.1 in sHTAD-NSx; 8.1 in sHTAD-preSx; 6.3m/s in HV). Patients awaiting VSARR had markedly reduced in-plane (median IRF -2.2 vs 10.4 cm2/s in HV, p=0.001), but increased through-plane flow rotation (median SFRR 7.8 vs 3.8% in HV, p=0.002), and decreased WSS (0.36 vs 0.47N/m2 in HV, p=0.004) in the proximal DescAo. After VSARR, proximal DescAo in-plane rotational flow (p=0.010) and circumferential WSS increased (p=0.011), no longer differing from HV, but through-plane rotational flow, axial WSS and stiffness remained altered. Patients in which aortic tortuosity was reduced after surgery showed greater post-surgical increase in IRF compared to those in which tortuosity increased (median IRF increase 18.1 vs 3.3cm²/s, p=0.047). Most AscAo flow alterations were restored to physiological values after VSARR. In patients with sHTAD, VSARR partially restores downstream fluid dynamics to physiological levels. However, some flow disturbances and increased stiffness persist in the proximal DescAo. Further longitudinal studies are needed to evaluate whether persistent alterations contribute to post-surgical risk.

Early and late experience of the modified aortic reimplantation operation

ObjectiveValve-sparing aortic root replacement for proximal aortic dilation with aortic regurgitation is associated with excellent outcomes. Modified aortic reimplantation entails reducing the anulus size to the expected size for sex and body surface area and creating neosinuses to preserve the aortic valve. We present our mid- and late-term outcomes with the modified technique, including a single-surgeon's experience over the past 2 decades. MethodsFrom January 2002 to January 2024, 528 patients underwent modified aortic reimplantation for aortic aneurysm or dilation; 491 were included in this study. End points included time-related mortality and postoperative morbidities, including aortic valve reintervention and longitudinal aortic regurgitation grade. ResultsThere were no operative deaths. Survival at 30 days, 1 year, and 15 years were 100%, 99.6%, and 87%, respectively. Postoperative stroke occurred in 4 patients (0.81%) and reoperation for bleeding in 7 (1.4%). Moderate or severe aortic valve regurgitation was seen in 6.2% and 10% of patients at 1 and 10 years, respectively. Aortic valve mean gradients were 7.0 and 7.5 mm Hg at 1 and 10 years, respectively. Freedom from reintervention on the aortic valve was 99.9%, 99%, and 95% at 30 days, 1 year, and 15 years, respectively. ConclusionsModified aortic reimplantation technique is a reliable and reproducible technique with excellent mid- and long-term outcomes in survival and freedom from reintervention. The results advocate for modified reimplantation in patients with enlarged aortic roots, especially in younger patients with connective tissue disorder.

Utilizing a sutureless valve for prosthetic valve endocarditis after aortic root replacement

BackgroundReoperation following aortic root replacement is associated with significantly high operative mortality. Etiologies related to infection are known to increase the operative mortality rate more than other etiologies. In such a clinical setting, a sutureless valve could lower the operative mortality by shortening the cardiac arrest and the operative time.Case presentationA 61-year-old male underwent emergent aortic root and total arch replacement with an open stent graft for acute type-A aortic dissection. A bioprosthetic valve was employed for aortic root replacement using the double-sewing ring technique. A fungal infection by Candida parapsilosis was postoperatively detected and improved with intravenous antifungal drug administration. However, he developed congestive heart failure one year later, and the blood cultures turned positive repeatedly for Candida parapsilosis. The prosthetic valve infection was suspected upon identifying vegetation on the bioprosthetic valve through transthoracic echocardiography. The computed tomography scan and operative findings confirmed that the infection was localized on the prosthetic valve. Consequently, the infected valve was removed without a vascular conduit, and a sutureless valve was implanted. The postoperative course was uneventful, without any evidence of recurrent fungal infection, and the patient was discharged on postoperative day 28.ConclusionsDeploying a sutureless valve can facilitate a more straightforward and minimally invasive redo procedure. Preoperative computed tomography can predict the valve size, which is the key to implanting a sutureless valve successfully after the modified Bentall procedure.

The proximal extension of acute type A aortic dissection is associated with ascending aortic wall degeneration.

Aortic root involvement during acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) may depend on ascending aortic wall degeneration. Surgical decision-making for extended resection of the aortic root is clinically made without histopathology. The aim of the study was to investigate whether the degree of degeneration of the ascending aortic wall found in patients with ATAAD is associated with the aortic root involvement. Collectively, 141 consecutive patients undergoing ATAAD surgery at Tampere University Heart Hospital were investigated. The ascending aortic wall resected in surgery was processed for 11 different variables that describe medial and adventitial degeneration. In addition, atherosclerosis and inflammation were separately evaluated. Patients undergoing aortic root replacement were compared with those with supracoronary reconstruction of the ascending aorta with/without aortic valve surgery (root-sparing surgery) during a mean 4.9-year follow-up. Aortic root replacement together with the ascending aortic replacement was performed in 39% of the patients (n=55). The mean age for all patients was 65 years [standard deviation (SD 13)]. Many patients with aortic root replacement had moderate to severe aortic valve regurgitation (85.5%). Most of the patients with aortic root-sparing surgery included a supracoronary tube prosthesis (89.5%), while nine patients also had aortic valve replacement. The degree of mucoid extracellular matrix accumulation was more prominent in patients with aortic root replacement compared to patients with root-sparing surgery (2.1 SD 0.4 vs. 1.9 SD 0.4, P=0.04, respectively). During follow-up, there were 52 deaths among patients (log rank P=0.79). Histopathology of the ascending aorta during ATAAD reveals distinctive aortic wall degeneration in patients with aortic root involvement vs. not. The degree of mucoid extracellular matrix accumulation assessed postoperatively is associated with the choice of surgical procedure in many patients.

Early outcomes of total arch replacement in the treatment of aortic dissection

Abstract: Overview: Aortic dissection are severe pathologies with high mortality and complication rates post-surgery despite significant advancements in both diagnosis and surgical treatment. Aortic arch replacement surgery is a classic and highly effective treatment method at Cho Ray Hospital. Objectives: Describe clinical, paraclinical characteristics, postoperative results, general complications and early hospital mortality. Methods: Descriptive cross sectional study. Results: 102 patients underwent aortic arch replacement surgery due to aortic dissection. Males predominated at 72.5%. The male:female ratio was 2.5:1. The average age was 56.45 ± 11.79 years. A history of hypertension was present in 81.4% of cases. Most patients with aortic dissection were admitted in an acute condition, accounting for 95%. Patients with type A aortic dissection accounted for 87.3%, with the entry tear in the ascending aorta at 27.5%. Isolated aortic arch replacement was performed in 46.1% of patients, while 53.9% underwent aortic arch replacement with frozen elephant trunk technique. 7 patients required aortic root replacement, 7 needed aortic valve surgery, and 10 required CABG. Most patients were cooled to 25 degrees C with cerebral perfusion to three branches. Ascending aorta cannulation was established in 45.2% of cases. The average cardiopulmonary bypass time was 257.7 minutes, with selective cerebral perfusion time at 115.9 minutes and lower body circulatory arrest time averaging 57.2 minutes. Postoperative neurological complications occurred in 10.8%, and the rate of renal failure requiring dialysis was 17.8%. The mortality rate was 9.6%. Longer cardiopulmonary bypass times and body temperatures above 25 degrees significantly increased the rate of postoperative renal failure requiring dialysis. Patients with postoperative renal failure requiring dialysis had a statistically significant increase in postoperative mortality rates. Aortic root intervention surgery combined with arch replacement did not affect the rate of postoperative complications. Aortic arch replacement with frozen elephant trunk technique did not affect cardiopulmonary bypass time, clamping time, or the rate of postoperative complications. Conclusions: Total arch replacement at Cho Ray Hospital initially showed a safe and effective with acceptable mortality rate.

Giant Morgagni hernia and aorto-pulmonary collaterals in a Loeys-Dietz patient undergoing surgery for aortic root aneurysm and mitral valve prolapse.

The case of a Loeys-Dietz syndrome patient undergoing mitral valve repair and composite aortic root and valve replacement is here described: preoperative CT scan unravelled a previously misdiagnosed Morgagni hernia (anterior diaphragmatic), containing omentum only, compressing the right ventricle. Intraoperatively, an abnormal oxygenated blood backflow into the left ventricle was observed, postoperatively found to be caused by major aorto-pulmonary collateral arteries. This is the 1st case of Morgagni hernia and systemic-pulmonary shunt ever reported associated with Loeys-Dietz syndrome. These congenital features may be important in both phenotyping and surgical management.

A Case of Aortic Valve Replacement after 20 Years of Aortic Root Replacement by Cryopreserved Homograft

A Case of Aortic Valve Replacement after 20 Years of Aortic Root Replacement by Cryopreserved Homograft

366 A Case Study: Application of Personalised External Aortic Root Support to Overcome a Failing Ross Procedure

Abstract Aortic root aneurysms are traditionally treated by aortic root replacement surgery alone or in combination with aortic valve replacement in a Modified Bentall procedure. We present a novel surgical approach using a Personalised External Aortic Root Support (PEARS) in the management of an aortic root aneurysm in a 24-year-old male, initially presenting in infancy with mixed aortic valve disease who underwent a free root Ross procedure in 2010 aged 11. Follow-up cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and transthoracic echocardiography showed mild aortic and pulmonary valve regurgitation with aortic root dilatation (51mm). In 2022, Computerised tomography (CT) exhibited dilation of the Sinus of Valsalva (43mm) and ascending aorta (56 mm). MDT review deemed redo valve-sparing root replacement appropriate as the ascending aorta was &amp;gt;55mm with an approximate 8mm increase over three years. As the young patient wished to avoid warfarinisation and the autograft valve maintained good function, a reduction PEARS was considered. In September 2023, a reduced aortic PEARS graft (80% reduction) was implemented along with a redo of the right ventricle to pulmonary artery conduit. Whilst applying the PEARS it was noted that there was a retroaortic circumflex artery, care was taken to mobilise this aberrant vessel to avoid compression by the graft. Cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp times were 180 and 116 minutes respectively. Intraoperative transoesophageal echocardiography confirmed good bi-ventricular function with no pulmonary regurgitation additionally on postoperative CT the aortic diameter was 38mm. In conclusion, application of a reduction PEARS is a potential alternative to a valve-sparing aortic root replacement method in young patients.

Importance of surgeon's experience in practicing valve-sparing aortic root replacement

BackgroundValve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) requires a unique skill set. This study aimed to examine the influence of surgeon's procedural volume on outcomes of VSRR. MethodsThis retrospective study included 1697 patients from 2 large, high-volume aortic centers who underwent aortic root replacement (ARR) between 2004 and 2021 and were potentially eligible for VSRR. Surgeons were classified as performing <5 ARRs or ≥5 ARRs annually. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the independent association of surgeon volume and the decision to perform VSRR. Inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to match patients who were operated on by <5 ARR surgeons or ≥5 ARR surgeons and compare long-term survival probability. Cumulative incidence curves with mortality as a competing risk were plotted to compare the rate of aortic valve reoperation. ResultsOf 1697 patients who met the study inclusion criteria, 944 underwent composite-valve conduit ARR and 753 underwent VSRR. The median age of the cohort was 57 years (interquartile range, 45-66 years), and 268 (15.8%) were female. Aortic insufficiency was present in 1105 patients (65.1%), and 200 of the procedures (11.8%) were reoperations. The indication for surgery was aneurysm in 1496 patients (88.2%) and dissection in 201 (11.8%). Among the 743 patients who underwent VSRR, 691 (92%) were operated on by ≥ 5 ARR surgeons and 62 (8%) were operated on by <5 ARR surgeons. In multivariable logistic regression, ≥5 ARRs (odds ratio, 3.33; 95% confidence interval, 2.34-4.73; P < .001) was associated with VSRR as the procedure of choice. Following IPTW, there was no significant difference between <5 ARR and ≥5 ARR surgeons in survival probability after VSRR (P = .59) or in the rate of aortic valve reoperation (P = .60). ConclusionsIn the setting of a high-volume aortic center, patients who undergo ARR are less likely to receive VSRR if operated on by a <5 ARR surgeon; however, VSRR may be safely performed by <5 ARR surgeons.

Incidence, risk factors, and long-term outcomes associated with permanent pacemaker implantation after aortic root replacement

ObjectivePermanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after aortic valve replacement is associated with long-term mortality. However, data regarding PPI after aortic root replacement (ARR) is lacking. Herein we describe the incidence, risk factors, and long-term outcomes of PPI after ARR. MethodsConsecutive patients undergoing ARR from 2005 to 2020 were selected after excluding those with endocarditis, type A dissection, or preoperative PPI. Patients requiring PPI after ARR were identified, along with the indication and timing. Independent factors associated with PPI after ARR were identified and long-term survival was assessed. ResultsThe incidence of PPI was 3.8% (n = 85) among 2240 patients undergoing ARR. PPI was performed a median of 7 days (interquartile range, 5-12 days) after ARR most commonly for complete heart block (73%). Bicuspid aortic valve (odds ratio [OR], 1.89; P = .02), female sex (OR, 1.74; P = .04), preoperative heart block (OR, 2.70; P = .02), and prior aortic valve replacement (OR, 2.18; P = .01) were independently associated with PPI while preoperative aortic insufficiency (OR, 0.52; P = .01) and valve-sparing root replacement procedure compared with bio-Bentall (OR, 0.40; P = .01) were protective. Patients requiring PPI after ARR were not at increased risk of operative or long-term mortality compared with patients not requiring PPI (P = .26); however, those undergoing PPI experienced significantly longer hospital length of stay (13 vs 7 days; P < .001). ConclusionsThe incidence of PPI after ARR remains low, particularly after VSRR. Preoperative conduction disturbance, prior AVR, and bicuspid aortic valve are all associated with increased risk of PPI. Although PPI is associated with longer length of stay, it is not associated with early or late mortality.

Impact of aortic root surgery during transcatheter aortic valve explant

BackgroundTranscatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) explantation is currently the fastest-growing cardiac surgery procedure. Issues surrounding TAVR explantation and subsequent surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), specifically aortic root surgery, merit further investigation. MethodsA retrospective review of an institutional database identified cases of SAVR after TAVR, with or without concomitant aortic root operations, performed between January 1, 2014, and July 1, 2023, identifying 26 patients. Conventional statistical methods were used to compare groups. ResultsThe mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality for aortic valve replacement was 11.1 ± 6.0% in our cohort. Eight of 26 patients (30.8%) had undergone prior cardiac surgery. Concomitant aortic root enlargement or replacement was required in 12 of the 26 patients (46.2%). The time from TAVR to removal was longer for those requiring root operations compared to those who did not (mean, 783 ± 908 days vs 492 ± 486 days; P = .046). There was a trend toward more frequent infective endocarditis in patients requiring root operations (46.2% [n = 5/12] vs 21.4% [n = 3/14]; P = .155). The 30-day mortality was 19.2% (n = 5/26), with an observed-to-expected ratio of 1.72. Mortality was not significantly different between the 2 groups. ConclusionsTAVR explant remains a high-risk procedure, although adding aortic root enlargement/replacement does not appear to amplify the short-term mortality risk when performed at an experienced institution. These results are important when considering lifetime management of aortic stenosis, particularly in low-risk patients likely to require multiple interventions.

Less invasive replacement of aortic root, ascending aorta and hemiarch via partial upper sternotomy: a propensity-score-matched comparison with full sternotomy.

Less invasive surgery has emerged as an option for aortic pathologies. The current study compared our experience on early postoperative results of patients with aortic surgery between partial upper sternotomy (PUS) and full sternotomy (FS). We performed a retrospective analysis of the data of patients undergoing aortic root surgery with concomitant ascending aorta and hemiarch replacement. Exclusion criteria were type A aortic dissection and other concomitant major cardiac surgery. After propensity score matching, we compared the perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing surgery with PUS versus FS. A total of 161 patients operated on between January 2013 and September 2022 met the inclusion criteria (PUS: n = 22, FS: n = 139). Propensity score matching yielded 22 pairs with a balanced distribution of propensity scores and covariates between the compared groups. There was no evidence that PUS affects cardiopulmonary bypass [108 (67-119) vs 113 (87-148) min, P = 0.154; PUS vs FS] and circulatory arrest duration [9 (7-10) vs 9 (8-13) min, P = 0.264; PUS vs FS]. There was a reduced cross-clamp duration in the PUS group [88 (58-96) vs 92 (71-122) min, P = 0.032]. Cumulative sum charts have shown consistently low cross-clamp and circulatory arrest duration for 2 experienced surgeons who performed 20 of the procedures in the PUS group (10 each). Perioperative mortality and morbidity were low, with no in-hospital mortality in the PUS group [0 vs 1(4.5%), P > 0.999] and absence of strokes in both groups. In summary, our initial experience suggests that less invasive aortic root, ascending aorta and hemiarch replacement via PUS could be performed in our patient cohort as safely as via full sternotomy. Advantages for the patient are reduced surgical trauma, improved cosmetic results and-presumably-less pain.

Adverse Technical Events During Aortic Root Replacement

BackgroundAlthough adverse technical events during aortic root replacement (ARR) are not uncommon and are extremely challenging, there is scant literature to help surgeons prepare for such situations. We describe our experience of outstanding technical events during ARR. MethodsThis is a retrospective study of 830 consecutive ARRs at a single center from 2012 to 2022. Technical events were defined as intraoperative events that led to an unplanned cardiac procedure, need for mechanical circulatory support, or additional aortic cross-clamping. Logistic regression identified factors associated with operative mortality and technical events. ResultsTechnical events occurred in 90 patients (10.8%) and were attributed to bleeding (n = 26), nonischemic ventricular dysfunction (n = 23), residual valve disease (n = 20), myocardial ischemia (n = 19), and iatrogenic dissection (n = 2). Prior sternotomy (odds ratio [OR], 2.38; 95% CI, 1.36-4.19; P = .002) and complex aortic valve disease (OR, 3.09; 95% CI, 1.09-8.75; P = .03) were associated with technical events. Patients with technical events had higher rates of operative mortality (6.7% vs 2.3%, P = .03) and all major postoperative complications. Surgical indications of dissection (OR, 13.57; 95% CI, 4.95-37.23; P < .001) and complex aortic valve disease (OR, 14.09; 95% CI, 3.67-54.02; P < .001) but not adverse technical events (OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 0.81-7.26; P = .11) were associated with operative mortality. ConclusionsAdverse technical events occurred in 10.8% of ARRs and were associated with reoperative sternotomies. Technical events are associated with increased postoperative complications.

Mid-Term Outcomes of Aortic Valve Repair Without Aortic Root Replacement: A Single-Center Experience.

Background Aortic valve (AV) repair is a challenging procedure due to its complexity, lower reproducibility, and steep learning curve. To examine its durability and validity, we investigated mid-term outcomes following AV repair without aortic root replacement. Methods Between March 2007 and May 2018, we retrospectively identified 14 patients who underwent AV repair without aortic root replacement at our institution. We investigated their baseline characteristics and postoperative outcomes, including the reoperation rate due to aortic regurgitation (AR) recurrence. Furthermore, we divided them into two groups: those who required reoperation due to AR recurrence (Group R) and those who did not require reoperation (Group F), and statistically compared them. Results The median age was 52.5 years (IQR: 42.0-60.8), with 11 male patients (78.6%). Eight patients (57.1%) had a bicuspid AV. Five cases (35.7%) underwent reoperation due to AR recurrence during a median follow-up period of 5.5 years. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between Group R (n=5, 35.7%) and Group F (n=9, 64.3%), including AR etiology, AV repair procedure, and intraoperative AR grade after the final declamp. All cases in Group R had at least mild to moderate AR on the echocardiogram before discharge. Regarding the AR grade before discharge, Group R had a significantly higher grade than Group F (p = 0.013). Conclusions The indication for AV repair for AR might need to be reassessed due to the considerable mid-term reoperation rate. Cases of AV repair with more than mild AR at discharge should be carefully monitored, as they are likely to require future reoperation for AR.

The role of concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting in acute type A aortic dissection complicated by coronary malperfusion.

Managing acute type A aortic dissection with coronary malperfusion is challenging. This study outlines our revascularization strategy for these patients. Patients undergoing surgery for acute type A aortic dissection with coronary malperfusion and aortic root involvement from January 2000 to December 2021 were included. Patients were classified using the Neri classification for coronary dissection, including a novel 'Neri -' class (no coronary dissection). Patients undergoing revascularization either as a planned or as a bailout strategy due to persisting low cardiac output were compared additionally. The cohort comprised 195 patients: 43 (22%) Neri -, 43 (22%) Neri A, 74 (38%) Neri B and 35 (18%) Neri C. Aortic root replacement was mainly performed in 25 Neri C patients (71%; P < 0.001). Concomitant bypass surgery was performed in 4 (9%) of Neri -, 5 (12%) of Neri A, 21 (28%) of Neri B and 32 (91%) of Neri C patients (P < 0.001). Thirty-day mortality was 42% with 21 (49%) Neri -, 12 (28%) Neri A, 30 (41%) Neri B and 19 (54%) Neri C patients (P = 0.087). Bailout revascularization was primarily performed in 11 Neri B patients (69%; P = 0.001) and associated with a higher 30-day mortality of 81% compared to 48% for planned revascularization (P = 0.042). Postoperative outcomes in case of coronary malperfusion are poor, irrespective of the anatomic dissection pattern. The decision for concomitant bypass surgery is crucial but may be considered in Neri C patients combined with aortic root replacement. Bailout revascularization was most common in Neri B and showed dismal outcome.

Long-term outcomes of total arch replacement with bilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion using the "arch first" approach.

To report outcomes of total arch replacement (TAR) with hypothermic circulatory arrest and bilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion (bACP) using an "arch first" approach for acute Type A aortic dissection (ATAAD). The "arch first" approach involved revascularization of the aortic arch branch vessels with uninterrupted ACP, before lower body circulatory arrest, while the patient was cooling. This was an observational study of aortic surgeries from 2010 to 2021. All patients who underwent TAR with bACP for ATAAD were included. Short-term and long-term outcomes were reported utilizing descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier survival estimation. A total of 215 patients were identified who underwent TAR + bACP for ATAAD. Age was 59.0 [49.0-67.0] years and 35.3% were female. 73 patients (34.0%) underwent a concomitant aortic root replacement, 188 (87.4%) had aortic cannulation, circulatory arrest time was 37.0 [26.0-52.0] minutes, and nadir temperature was 20.8 [19.4-22.5] degrees Celsius. 35 patients (16.3%) had operative mortality (STS definition), 17 (7.9%) had a new stroke, 79 (36.7%) had prolonged mechanical ventilation (>24h), 35 (16.3%) had acute renal failure (by RIFLE criteria), and 128 (59.5%) had blood product transfusions. One-year survival was 77.1%, while 5-years survival was 67.1%. During follow-up, there were 23 (10.7%) reinterventions involving the descending thoracic aorta - either thoracic endovascular aortic repair or open thoracoabdominal aortic replacement. Among patients with ATAAD, short-term postoperative outcomes after TAR + bACP using the "arch first" approach are acceptable. Moreover, this operative strategy may furnish long-term durability, with a reasonably low reintervention rate and satisfactory overall survival.

Modeling of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation after aortic root replacement using a 3-dimensional artificial intelligence algorithm

ObjectiveAortic root replacement requires construction of a composite valve-graft and reimplantation of coronary arteries. This study assessed the feasibility of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation after aortic root replacement. MethodsA retrospective review was conducted on 74 consecutive patients who received a composite valve-graft at a single institution from 2019 to 2021. Forty patients had bioprosthetic valves with adequate postoperative gated computed tomographic angiography scans. Computational simulations of balloon and self-expanding transcatheter valve deployments were performed. The modeled coronary distances were compared with traditional, manually measured valve-to-coronary distances. ResultsThere was a statistically significant difference in the modeled versus manual measurements of valve to coronary distances for all patients regardless of valve type or coronary artery analyzed (P < .05). Most patients are low risk for coronary obstruction per 3-dimensional modeling, including those with a valve-to-coronary distance <4 mm. Only 1 patient (2.5%) was at risk for coronary obstruction for the left coronary artery using a balloon valve. No other valve combination was considered high risk of coronary obstruction. Five patients (12.5%) were at risk for possible valve stent deformation at the outflow, due to angulation at the graft anastomosis. ConclusionsFollowing aortic root replacement, all patients were candidates for valve-in-valve procedure using 1 or both types of transcatheter heart valves. Self-expanding valves may be at higher risk for stent frame deformation at graft anastomotic lines and balloon-expandable valves may be at higher risk of coronary obstruction.