Tear In Arch Research Articles

Effects of Residual Arch Tears on Late Outcomes After Hemiarch Replacement for DeBakey I Dissection

BackgroundThis study evaluated the effect of residual arch tears on late reinterventions and arch dilatation after hemiarch replacement for patients with acute DeBakey type I aortic dissection. MethodsBetween January 1995 and October 2018, 160 consecutive patients who underwent hemiarch replacement for DeBakey type I dissection were retrospectively enrolled. They were divided into patients with (n = 73) and without (n = 87) residual arch tears. The arch tears group was subdivided into the proximal/middle arch (n = 26) and distal arch (n = 47) groups to evaluate arch growth rates according to the locations of residual arch tears. The endpoints were arch growth rate and late arch and composite events. ResultsThe arch diameter increased significantly over time in patients with residual arch tears (1.620 mm/y, P < .001). The increase occurred more rapidly when residual tears occurred at the distal arch than at the proximal/middle arch level (2.101 vs 1.001 mm/y). In the adjusted linear mixed model, residual arch tears or luminal communications at the distal arch level were significant factors associated with increases in the arch diameter over time. The 10-year freedom from late arch and composite event rate was significantly lower for patients with residual arch tears than for those without (82.4% vs 95.5%, P = .001; and 68.0% vs 89.3%, P = .002, respectively). ConclusionsResidual arch tears are significant factors associated with late arch dilatation and reinterventions, especially for patients with distal arch tears. Extensive arch replacement during the initial surgery to avoid residual arch tears may improve long-term outcomes.

Non-A non-B acute aortic dissection with entry tear in the aortic arch.

OBJECTIVESOur aim was to describe the outcomes of the latest treatment options of acute non-A non-B aortic dissection involving an entry tear in the aortic arch.METHODSIncluded were patients who presented between January 2001 and February 2020 with a non-A non-B aortic dissection involving the aortic arch but not the ascending aorta and with the most proximal entry tear located within the aortic arch between the innominate and left subclavian artery. Clinical data and operative details were retrieved from medical histories and surgical protocols. Preoperative, postoperative and follow-up computed tomography angiography scans were analysed.RESULTSWe analysed a total of 39 patients [median age 62 (52; 67) years, men 76.9%] with non-A non-B arch entry aortic dissections type. They underwent 15 thoracic endovascular aortic repairs, 20 frozen elephant trunk implantations, 1 hybrid arch replacement, or 1 conventional arch replacement. Two patients were managed conservatively. Twelve (31%) patients underwent emergent intervention, 12 (31%) were treated invasively within 2 weeks. Another 2 (5%) and 9 (23%) patients were treated 2 and 4 weeks after dissection occurred, respectively. Six (15%) patients presented with an impending aortic rupture, while 19 (49%) had at least one malperfused organ. Four patients (27%) died after thoracic endovascular aortic repair; the 30-day mortality following frozen elephant trunk was 0%.CONCLUSIONSNon-A non-B acute aortic dissection reveals a frequently complicated course requiring emergency intervention. The majority of patients required aortic arch repair within the first 2 weeks. Total arch replacement with the frozen elephant trunk technique seems to be low procedural mortality, and may become the treatment of choice in arch entry non-A non-B aortic dissection.

Hemiarch replacement with aortic root preservation for acute type A aortic dissection

: Acute Type A aortic dissection (TAAD) is a surgical emergency requiring expeditious management. The surgical principles involve restoration of true lumen blood flow with obliteration of the primary tear thereby mitigating malperfusion and restoring valvular competency. At our institution 60% of TAAD patients are treated with a hemiarch and the other 40% are treated with a total arch replacement (TAR). All cases employ the use of cerebral protection. For hemiarch replacement, retrograde cerebral perfusion (RCP), via the superior vena cava (SVC), is utilized. Antegrade cerebral perfusion is utilized via brachiocephalic vessels during a TAR. Electroencephalogram (EEG) and somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEP) are used for neurocerebral monitoring with the aim of electrical silence before circulatory arrest. Key radiographic and clinical findings are used to adjudicate between these two procedures pre and intraoperatively. Patients with any of the following undergo a TAR at our institution: (I) aortic arch aneurysm, (II) primary or re-entry tear in the aortic arch or proximal descending aorta, (III) circumferential dissection of the aortic arch, or (IV) carotid body dissection or thrombosis. Irrespective of the procedure chosen, central aortic cannulation is routinely performed via modified Seldinger technique with transesophageal echocardiography guidance. The proximal aorta is addressed while the patient is systemically cooled to hypothermia. All effort is made to retain the native aortic root and valve where possible. However, in cases where the aortic root is dilated or has a tear, a valve sparing root replacement or a modified Bentall is performed. The operative strategy for a TAAD at our institution is predicated on a tear-based paradigm. However, the extent of aortic reconstruction may be different based on surgeon and center experience.

Limited vs. extended repair for acute type I aortic dissection: long-term outcomes over a decade in Beijing Anzhen Hospital.

Limited vs. extended repair for acute type I aortic dissection: long-term outcomes over a decade in Beijing Anzhen Hospital.

Techniques and outcomes of total aortic arch repair with frozen elephant trunk for DeBakey I dissections.

Total aortic arch replacement (TAR) with frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique (FET) has been increasingly used to treat a variety of aortic pathologies over the past two decades. Because FET can effectively treat the diseased arch and cover the proximal entry tear in the distal arch, it is a valuable option in the treatment of DeBakey I aortic dissections. This report focuses on the techniques and outcomes of TAR with FET for acute/chronic aortic dissection. A review of pooled literature including 27 observational studies showed in-hospital mortality, permanent stroke, and spinal cord injury rates of 8.4%, 5.9% and 2.6% for acute aortic dissections, and 7.5%, 4.0% and 4.6% for chronic aortic dissections, respectively. In most of the studies, complete false lumen thrombosis rate was achieved in 80% of patients at the level of FET for acute and chronic aortic dissections. Mid-term outcomes are equally promising. For chronic aortic dissections, positive remodeling of the non-stented distal aortic segments is less frequent leading to secondary reinterventions within 3 to 5 years. However, most studies have not applied distal abdominal extensions of the repair using fenestrated and branched endografts. In the current endovascular era, TAR + FET should be considered as an alternative to conventional open surgical repair in centers of excellence.

Acute Type A Aortic Dissection: Pre-Operative Clinical and Radiological Predictors of Outcome

AbstractBackground: Acute type A aortic dissection is a surgical emergency associated with high morbidity and mortality and is still a surgical challenge. The aim of our work is to evaluate the impact of pre-operative clinical status of different malp-erfusion symptoms (according to Penn classification) and radiological findings on surgical outcome of acute type A dissection patients.Aim of Study: Is to report our experience in surgical management of acute type A dissection patients and to deter-mine the impact of pre-operative ischaemia (by Penn class) on post-operative outcome.Patients and Methods: Between January 2012 and De-cember 2014, 30 patients (23 males, 7 females) with acute type A aortic dissection were operated upon at Kasr Al-Aini Cardiac Surgery Unit, Cairo University. All patients presented with severe chest pain and pulse deficit. Their age ranged from 30 to 70 years. 2 patients had bicuspid aortic valve and 8 patients had Marfan syndrome. 3 patients had acute lower limb ischemia, 6 had renal malperfusion and 4 had massive pericardial effusion. All patients had pre-operative multislice CT aortography with 4 patients showing extensive arch tears and 4 patients had dissected coronary arteries on multislice CT of the coronaries. 13 patients had supracoronary conduit replacement of ascending aorta, 13 had modified Bentall operation, and 4 had valve-sparing (David) operation. All patients had circulatory arrest at moderate hypothermia and cerebral protection for open repair of the dissected aortic arch.Results: The mean cross clamp time was 145±25minutes, and total circulatory arrest time was 25±10 minutes. Patients with pre-operative malperfusion had more prolonged and complicated post-operative stay. There was 5 (17%) post-operative mortality: 1 due to massive bleeding, 2 due to prolonged ventilation following stroke, 1 due to hepato-renal failure and 1 due to myocardial failure.Conclusion: Surgical treatment of acute type A aortic dissection is challenging and requires a well-planned strategy to get optimum outcome.Dissection patients with malperfusion syndromes, circum-ferential arch tears, and dissected coronaries carry higher risk of mortality.

Surgical outcomes of acute type A aortic dissection in dialysis patients.

Acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) is relatively uncommon in dialysis patients, and characteristics and repair outcomes are not fully understood. Patients with ATAAD (n = 960) were divided into a dialysis group (n = 19) and non-dialysis group (n = 941), depending on whether they required dialysis for preoperative end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Hospital charts and imaging data were reviewed, and characteristics and outcomes were compared between the groups. Segmental aortic wall or intima/media flap calcification in the thoracic and abdominal aorta was assessed in the dialysis patients. The leading primary causes of ESRD were polycystic kidney disease (n = 5) and chronic glomerulonephritis (n = 5). There were no significant differences (dialysis group vs. non-dialysis group) in age (60.5 vs. 64.5years), preoperative hemodynamics, or organ ischemia. Dialysis patients were more likely to have an entry tear in the aortic arch (42% vs. 15%, p = 0.003). These patients showed moderate-to-severe calcification (multiple focal or single focal calcification > 10mm) in the ascending aorta (17%), aortic arch (61%), descending aorta (67%), and abdominal aorta (83%). Arch replacement was common in this group (37% vs. 18%, p = 0.030). Although in-hospital mortality was increased in this group (21% vs. 7%, p = 0.059), morbidities did not differ significantly. Six-year survival was 60.3 ± 13.4% and 78.8 ± 1.6%, respectively (p = 0.01). Dialysis patients tend to have aortic calcification and a primary tear in the aortic arch. Outcomes are acceptable.

Single Low-Volume Center Experience with Frozen Elephant Trunk in Acute Type A Aortic Dissections.

Background Acute Type A aortic dissection (AAAD) is a surgical emergency. In patients with arch and descending aorta involvement (DeBakey Type I), a total aortic arch replacement with frozen elephant trunk (FET) could favor false lumen thrombosis and improve long-term results. The authors hereby present their experience with this technique in a single low-volume center, to assess whether the technique is feasible to treat such disease. Methods From January 2011 to December 2016, 43 patients with AAAD were operated on in the authors' institution, which carries out 300 to 350 annual procedures. Among these, 12 patients with an intimal tear in the aortic arch and/or proximal descending aorta received a FET procedure (10 males, age 57 years). Concomitant procedures were aortic valve replacement (42%), Bentall (25%), and aortic valve repair (17%). Results Cardiopulmonary bypass, cardiac arrest, and circulatory arrest times were 235 ± 43, 171 ± 33, and 75 ± 20 minutes, respectively. The operative mortality was 16.7% ( n = 2). Stroke and re-thoracotomy for bleeding occurred in 8% ( n = 1) and 8% ( n = 1), respectively. There was no spinal cord injury. Follow-up was 36.1 months. During follow-up, no patients died or required a reoperation on the downstream aorta. Conclusion Although all patients were operated on in a low-volume center, the results with FET in AAAD are acceptable. Even though this technique demands high technical skills, it is a promising approach in patients with acute aortic dissection.

Late outcomes of strategic arch resection in acute type A aortic dissection

ObjectiveTo compare perioperative and long-term outcomes in patients undergoing hemiarch and aggressive arch replacement for acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD). MethodsFrom 1996 to 2017, we compared outcomes of hemiarch (n = 322) versus aggressive arch replacements (zones 2 and 3 arch replacement with implantation of 2-4 arch branches, n = 150) in ATAAD. Indications for aggressive arch were arch aneurysm >4 cm or intimal tear in the aortic arch that was not resectable by hemiarch replacement, or dissection of arch branches with malperfusion. ResultsPatients in the aggressive arch group were significantly younger (mean age: 57 vs 61 years old) and had significantly longer hypothermic circulatory arrest, cardiopulmonary bypass, and aortic crossclamp times. There were no significant differences in perioperative outcomes between hemiarch and aggressive arch groups, including 30-day mortality (5.3% vs 7.3%, P = .38) and postoperative stroke rate (7% vs 7%, P = .96). Over 15 years, Kaplan–Meier survival was similar between hemiarch and aggressive arch groups (log-rank P = .55, 10-year survival 70% vs 72%). Given death as a competing factor, incidence rates of reoperation over 15 years (2.1% vs 2.0% per year, P = 1) and 10-year cumulative incidence of reoperation (14% vs 12%, P = .89) for arch and distal aorta pathology were similar between the 2 groups. ConclusionsBoth hemiarch and aggressive arch replacement are appropriate approaches for select patients with ATAAD. Aggressive arch replacement should be considered for an arch aneurysm >4 cm or an intimal tear at the arch unable to be resected by hemiarch replacement, or dissection of the arch branches with malperfusion.

Residual Arch Tears and Major Adverse Events After Acute DeBakey Type I Aortic Dissection Repair

Tear-oriented surgical procedure is considered a standard treatment for acute DeBakey type I aortic dissection (AIAD). However, long-term surgical outcomes, including aortic growth and rate of major adverse aortic events (MAAEs), have yet to be clarified. Of the 274 patients who underwent surgical repair for AIAD between 2009 and 2016, 105 patients with both predischarge and follow-up computed tomographic scans were enrolled. The surgical extent was determined by primary entry tear location. We measured aortic diameters (pulmonary artery bifurcation, maximum diameter of the descending thoracic aorta [maxDTA], andceliac axis) and compared MAAEs (aorta growth rate ≥ 5 mm/year or maxDTA ≥ 55 mm according to surgical extent). Twenty-nine patients underwent total arch replacement (TAR); 76 underwent non-TAR. In the non-TAR group, patients with or without residual tears in the arch vessels were classified as having complete arch repair (non-TAR-CAR, n= 52) or incomplete arch repair (non-TAR-IAR, n= 24). Considerable differences were found in the aortic growth rate between the TAR and non-TAR groups and the non-TAR-CAR and non-TAR-IAR groups. Freedom from MAAEs at 5 years was considerably higher in the non-TAR-CAR group than in the non-TAR-IAR group (84.5% versus 31.1%). However, no differences were observed in the aortic growth rate and freedom from MAAEs between the TAR and non-TAR-CAR groups. Classic tear-oriented surgical procedure is insufficient for optimal long-term surgical outcomes, mainly regarding aortic dilation. CAR without residual arch vessel tears leads to favorable aortic remodeling in the residual DTA and prevents MAAEs after AIAD repair.

Identification of CTA-Based Predictive Findings for Temporary and Permanent Neurological Dysfunction after Repair in Acute Type A Aortic Dissection

The aim of this study was to determine CT risk findings predictive of temporary neurological dysfunction (TND) and permanent neurological dysfunction (PND) after surgical repair for acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD). A total of 255 patients (41 ± 16 years, 79% male) with ATAAD underwent aortic CT angiography (CTA) and surgical repair consecutively from January 2013 to June 2016. The CTA findings of the 255 patients for the thoracic aorta and carotid artery were analysed to identify risk factors predictive of TND and PND. Thirty-eight patients (15%) suffered TND, and 18 (7%) exhibited PND. Common carotid artery (CCA) dissection (OR = 4.63), lower enhancement of unilateral ICA (OR = 3.02) and aortic arch tears (OR = 2.83) were predictors of postoperative TND, while PND was best predicted by retrograde ascending aorta (aAO) dissection (OR = 5.62) and aortic arch tears (OR = 6.74). In CCA dissection, the extent of the entire CCA and proximal ICA (P = 0.014), a low-enhancement false lumen with re-entry (P = 0.000) and a severely narrowed true lumen without re-entry (P = 0.005) significantly increased the risk of postoperative TND. In patients with ATAAD, specific CT findings allow the individual risk of postoperative TND and PND to be identified and may guide subsequent surgical management.

In DeBakey Type I Aortic Dissection, Bovine Aortic Arch Is Associated With Arch Tears and Stroke

The study sought to evaluate if a bovine aortic arch (BAA) influences the location of the entry site in acute aortic dissection type A (AADA) and to identify the impact of BAA on postoperative outcome, especially stroke. A total of 315 patients underwent surgery due to AADA DeBakey type I (72.1% men, mean age 59.5 ± 13.4 years) between 2002 and 2015. Imaging studies and operative reports were screened for presence of BAA and location of the entry site. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on presence (BAA+) and absence (BAA-) of BAA (BAA+ n= 49, BAA- n= 264). Dissection patterns, surgical treatment, risk factors for postoperative complications, and long-term outcome were analyzed. Prevalence of BAA in patients with AADA was 15.6%. Location of the entry site was more commonly in the aortic arch in patients with BAA (BAA+ 46.8% versus BAA- 14.3%; p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis identified BAA (odds ratio [OR], 5.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.89 to 12.04; p < 0.001) and preoperative competent aortic valve (OR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.19 to 4.31; p= 0.013) as independent predictors for an arch tear. Thirty-nine patients (12.4%) suffered from stroke. Patients with BAA had higher stroke rates (BAA+ 24.5% versus BAA- 10.2%; p= 0.009). BAA emerged as one risk factor for stroke in the setting of AADA (OR, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.2 to 6.0; p= 0.016). Long-term survival was comparable for patients with BAA and patients without congenital arch anomalies. BAA is an independent predictor for the distinctive location of the entry site in the aortic arch and risk factor for stroke.

Concomitant antegrade stent grafting of the descending thoracic aorta during transverse hemiarch reconstruction for acute DeBakey I aortic dissection repair improves aortic remodeling.

Concomitant endovascular stent grafting of the descending thoracic aorta during open repair for acute DeBakey I aortic dissection can be performed in patients with extensive dissection and malperfusion. We analyzed the effects of this strategy on distal aortic remodeling. From 2006-2014, acute DeBakey I dissection patients without primary aortic arch tear undergoing open distal hemiarch reconstruction (Standard group) versus those undergoing hemiarch with descending thoracic aorta (DTA) thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR group) were retrospectively reviewed. We studied aortic remodeling only in patients with three-dimensional computed tomography scans available at 1 and 12 months following surgery (Standard group n = 26; Stent group n = 21). At 1 month, abdominal aortic diameters were similar, but true lumen (TL) and true lumen to total diameter ratios (TL index [TLI]) in the DTA were significantly improved in the TEVAR group (P < 0.05). Mean number of fenestrations were similar (1.8 ± 1.5 vs. 2.4 ± 1.9, P = 0.32). At 12 months, DTA true lumen and TLI remained significantly improved in the TEVAR group at all locations (P < 0.01). This translated to increased complete false lumen thrombosis rates in the thoracic aorta (83% vs. 32%, P = 0.01) in the TEVAR group. In the Standard group, DTA true lumen diameter and TL index were significantly decreased at 12 months compared to 1 month time period (P < 0.05). In the TEVAR group, DTA true lumen diameters and TLI were significantly improved at 12 months (P < 0.05). Antegrade TEVAR during open repair for DeBakey I dissection improves DTA remodeling by increasing true lumen diameter without enlargement of the total aortic diameter and by promoting false lumen thrombosis.

Acute DeBakey Type I aortic dissection without intimal tear in the arch: is total arch replacement the right choice?

Surgical management of acute DeBakey Type I aortic dissection without intimal tear in the aortic arch is controversial. This study compared short- and long-term outcomes of total arch replacement (TAR) versus limited ascending aorta/hemiarch replacement (no-TAR) in a consecutive series of patients. Between January 1998 and December 2015, 220 consecutive patients were operated for DeBakey Type I acute aortic dissection; 135 cases did not exhibit an intimal entry tear in the aortic arch and were subsequently selected to comprise the primary study cohort. A secondary subgroup analysis was made within these 135 cases, which comprised patients who received antegrade cerebral perfusion as the neuroprotective strategy of choice (n = 45). Mean follow-up period was 5 ± 4 years. Among the patients selected, 21 (16%) underwent TAR. Thirty-day mortality was higher in the TAR group (38% vs 21%, P = 0.04). Postoperative complication rates were similar between the groups (61% vs 73%, P = 0.31). Long-term mortality and late aortic reintervention rates were also similar (7% vs 30%, P = 0.36 and 27% vs 14%, P = 0.32, respectively). From the subgroup of patients with antegrade cerebral perfusion, 14 (31%) underwent TAR and 31 (69%) had no-TAR. Mean follow-up-time was 3 ± 2 years. Thirty-day mortality was higher in the TAR group (50% vs 16%, P < 0.01), postoperative complications, long-term mortality and late aortic reintervention rates were similar (64% vs 69%, P = 0.73; 0% vs 19%, P = 0.22; 29% vs 8%, P = 0.17, respectively). TAR was associated with higher 30-day mortality compared with the less extensive hemiarch replacement. In the long term, TAR showed a trend of improved survival and higher reintervention rate.

Endovascular repair of primary retrograde Stanford type A aortic dissection

Objective: To summarize the short- and mid-term results on endovascular repair of primary retrograde Stanford type A aortic dissection with an entry tear in distal aortic arch or descending aorta. Methods: Between December 2009 and December 2014, 21 male patients of primary retrograde Stanford type A aortic dissection with a mean age of (52±9) years received endovascular repair in Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Jinling Hospital. Among the 21 cases, 17 patients were presented as ascending aortic intramural hematoma, 4 patients as active blood flow in false lumen and partial thrombosis, 8 patients as ulcer on descending aorta combined intramural hematoma in descending aorta, and 13 patients as typical dissection changes. All patients received endovascular stent-graft repair successfully, with 15 cases in acute phase and 6 cases in chronic phase. Results: Cone stent was implanted in 13 cases, while straight stent in 8 cases, including 1 case of left common carotid-left subclavian artery bypass surgery and 1 case of restrictive bare-metal stent implantation. No perioperative stroke, paraplegia, stent fracture or displacement, limbs or abdominal organ ischemia or other severe complications occured, except for tracheotomy in 2 patients. Active blood flow in ascending aorta or aortic arch disappeared, and intramural hematoma started being absorbed on CT angiography images before discharge. All patients were alive during follow-up (6 to 72 months), and intramural hematoma in ascending aorta and aortic arch was absorbed thoroughly. Type Ⅰ endoleak and ulcer expansion were found in 1 patient, and type Ⅳ endoleak in distal stent was found in another one patient. Secondary ascending aortic dissection was found in 1 case two years later, which was cured by hybrid procedure with cardiopulmonary bypass. Conclusion: Endovascular repair of primary retrograde Stanford type A aortic dissection was safe and effective, which correlated with favorable short- and mid-term results.

Surgical outcomes for acute type A aortic dissection with aggressive primary entry resection.

An entry located at aortic arch in acute type A aortic dissection (AAAD) is uncommon. It remains controversial whether or not aggressive primary entry resection should be routinely performed in such patients. We have adopted an aggressive strategy of entry site resection, including total arch replacement (TAR) in patients with arch tears. The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of our surgical management approach, using aggressive primary entry resection. Between January 2000 and December 2014, we retrospectively reviewed the records of 334 patients with AAAD who underwent emergent surgery. The mean age was 67 ± 13 years (range, 20-95 years). Ninety-five patients (28%) presented with shock vital status, and 84 patients (25%) manifested malperfusion of branched arteries. Primary entry resection was achieved in 95% of patients under an aggressive surgical strategy [hemiarch replacement for 173 (52%) patients and TAR for 161 (48%) patients] concomitant with 22 coronary artery bypass grafts and 38 root replacements. Ninety-six percent of hospital survivors (298/311) were followed for a median of 39 months (range, 0-179 months). Operation, cardiopulmonary bypass, cardiac arrest, antegrade cerebral perfusion and lower body circulatory arrest times were 447 ± 170, 236 ± 93, 112 ± 74, 115 ± 81 and 54 ± 18 min, respectively. The 30-day mortality rate was 5.4%. The in-hospital mortality rate was 8.4% (6.9% at our hospital). Incidences of postoperative permanent neurological dysfunction, tracheotomy and newly permanent haemodialysis were 6.9, 8 and 2%, respectively, with no spinal cord injuries observed. Complete false lumen thrombosis was achieved in 57% of patients as visualized by postoperative computed tomography angiography. After 3, 5 and 10 years, overall survival rates were 81, 74 and 65%, respectively, and the percentages of patients free from downstream dissection-related reoperation were 89, 86 and 80%, respectively. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that the risk factors for downstream aortic reoperation were patent false lumen, residual primary entry tear and connective tissue disorder. The surgical outcomes following aggressive treatment of AAAD are satisfactory. False lumen thrombosis can be achieved in a relatively high proportion of patients using this technique, resulting in a low rate of subsequent downstream aortic reoperations.

Hemiarch replacement with concomitant antegrade stent grafting of the descending thoracic aorta versus total arch replacement for treatment of acute DeBakey I aortic dissection with arch tear

For acute DeBakey I aortic dissection with arch tear, conventional distal reconstruction entails total arch replacement (TAR). Some surgeons at our institution have utilized an alternative reconstructive strategy-primary arch tear repair and transverse hemiarch reconstruction (THR) with concomitant antegrade thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). We assessed early and mid-term outcomes comparing these two surgical strategies for arch tear management. A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained institutional aortic dissection database was carried out to compare early and mid-term outcomes for patients undergoing intervention for DeBakey I aortic dissection with arch tear. Hemiarch reconstruction with concomitant antegrade TEVAR was compared against conventional TAR. Arch tear at the origin of great vessels or greater curve was primarily repaired with interrupted sutures in TEVAR patients. From 2006 to 2013, 61 of 284 DeBakey I aortic dissection patients undergoing intervention for arch tear were retrospectively reviewed. Thirty-one patients had TAR (TAR group) and 30 patients had hemiarch + TEVAR (TEVAR group). Demographics and clinical presentation were similar. TEVAR group had more patients presenting in cardiogenic shock [3% (n = 1) vs 13% (n = 4), P = 0.2] and tamponade [10% (n = 3) vs 23% (n = 7), P = 0.2]. Intraoperatively, TEVAR group had lower cardiopulmonary bypass (239 ± 34 vs 313 ± 80 min, p0.001) and circulatory arrest (60 ± 15 vs 78 ± 45 min, P = 0.04) times. TAR group had higher in-hospital/30-day mortality [26% (n = 8) vs 13% (n = 4), P = 0.3], but stroke rates were similar [6% (n = 2) vs 7% (n = 2), P = 1]. One-year (80 ± 7.3 vs 71 ± 8.3%), 3-year (73 ± 8.3 vs 67 ± 8.6%) and 5-year (73 ± 8.3 vs 67 ± 8.6%) actuarial survival were improved in TEVAR group, although not significantly (log-rank, P = 0.56). TEVAR promoted increased false lumen thrombosis (43 vs 85%, P = 0.002). In treating DeBakey I aortic dissection with arch tear, hemiarch replacement with primary tear repair and concomitant TEVAR is a safe alternative to conventional TAR, with improved distal aortic remodelling.

Is Total Arch Replacement Associated With Worse Outcomes During Repair of Acute Type A Aortic Dissection?

As acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) remains a challenge, the extent of resection of the transverse arch remains debated during operative repair. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of total arch repair versus ascending/proximal arch repair for ATAAD. We retrospectively reviewed our aortic database of ATAAD between October 1999 and December 2014. Patients were divided into two groups: total arch repair versus proximal arch repair (hemiarch). Indications for arch replacement during ATAAD include aneurysm greater than 5 cm, complex arch tear, and arch rupture. Inhospital and long-term outcomes were compared between the two groups using univariate analysis and multiple logistic regression analysis. Survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and log rank statistics, and assessment of risk factors for survival was conducted by Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. During the study period, we performed 489 repairs of ATAAD, 49 patients (10%) with total arch replacement and 440 patients (90%) with proximal arch replacement. Patients with total arch repair were older (62.4 ± 13.4 years versus 57.9 ± 14.8 years, p = 0.046) and had significantly increased retrograde aortic dissection, circulatory arrest, and retrograde cerebral perfusion times. The incidences of early mortality, stroke, and need for renal dialysis between the total arch and proximal arch group were not significantly different: 20.4% (10 of 49) versus 12.9% (57 of 440), 8.2% (4 of 49) versus 10.5% (46 of 440), and 27% (13 of 49) versus 17.6% (76 of 432), respectively. Late survival did not demonstrate a difference between groups. Acute type A aortic dissection remains a challenge associated with significant mortality and morbidity. When compared with a less aggressive resection, total arch replacement performed in an individualized fashion can be associated with acceptable early and late outcomes for ATAAD and was not associated with worse outcomes.

Surgical Strategy for Retrograde Type A Aortic Dissection Based on Long-Term Outcomes

The optimal management of a retrograde type A aortic dissection (RAAD) is controversial, and few reports have discussed the long-term outcomes of surgical strategies. To determine the most appropriate strategy, we studied the early and late outcomes of RAAD cases. From 1998 to 2014, 44 patients with RAAD (mean age of 63 ± 11 years) underwent surgical repair. Ascending aortic replacement (AAR) was performed in 21 patients and ascending and total arch replacement (TAR) was performed in 23 patients. Eight of the patients who received TAR underwent complete resection of the primary tear in the distal arch or descending aorta (TAR-R[+]), whereas the remaining 15 patients received elephant trunk implantation as an alternative procedure for tear resection (TAR-R[-]). The early and late outcomes (mean follow-up, 86.5 months) were evaluated. Hospital mortality occurred in 4 of the 44 (9.1%) patients, with no mortalities among the patients undergoing TAR-R[-]. There was a tendency toward a higher incidence of late aorta-related events in the AAR group, with a significantly higher patency rate of the false lumen in the proximal site of the residual aorta compared with the TAR group (p = 0.009). Furthermore, the 5-year rate of freedom from aortic growth greater than 50 mm was significantly lower after AAR than after TAR (p = 0.04). A multivariate analysis indicated that the initial ascending aortic diameter (odds ratio [OR], 1.5; p = 0.02) and AAR (OR, 29.1; p = 0.01) were independent predictors of late aortic expansion. The surgical outcomes were acceptable in both the AAR and TAR groups. The long-term outcomes potentially support the aggressive adoption of TAR in relatively younger patients with significant ascending aortic enlargement at presentation.

Clinical significance of a false lumen pathway through the arch in acute type A aortic dissection and its influence on cervical branch compromise.

Upon onset of acute type A aortic dissection, the aortic true lumen generally becomes fixed around the supra-aortic branches in the greater curvature and Botallo's ligament in the lesser curvature of the aortic arch. Therefore, the pathways of the false lumen through the arch can be categorized as anterior, bilateral and posterior. We investigated the relationship between a false lumen pathway through the arch and cervical branch compromise, stratified by primary tear location. Sixty-four consecutive patients with acute type A aortic dissection underwent emergency surgery at our institution between March 2005 and October 2013. Of these, 40 cases (63%) were DeBakey type I, 15 cases (23%) were type II and 9 cases (14%) were type III-D (retrograde type A). We conducted a retrospective review of preoperative computed tomographic angiography using three-dimensional image post-processing tools for 43 cases, excluding 15 cases with type II and 6 cases with type I for which preoperative digital image data were not available. Of the 43 cases, 14, 18 and 11 revealed anterior, bilateral and posterior pathways, respectively. Twenty-one cases (49%) showed a primary intimal tear in the ascending aorta (8 anterior, 12 bilateral and 1 posterior), 12 cases (28%) showed a primary intimal tear in the aortic arch (5 anterior, 3 bilateral and 4 posterior) and 10 cases (23%) showed a primary intimal tear in the descending aorta (1 anterior, 3 bilateral and 6 posterior). Twelve of the 14 anterior pathway cases (86%) had a total of 26 supra-aortic branch compromises, 13 of the 18 bilateral pathway cases (72%) had a total of 20 supra-aortic branch compromises, while only 4 of the 11 posterior pathway cases (36%) had a total of four supra-aortic branch compromises. None of the 11 posterior pathway cases had a dissection extending into all 3 supra-aortic branches. Posterior pathway cases generally showed primary tear locations in the arch or descending aorta, and cervical branch compromise was rare. Aortic dissections tended to extend into the cervical branches through the anterior side of the aortic arch. A false lumen pathway through the arch was strongly associated with cervical branch compromise in acute type A aortic dissections.