Dataset Information

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

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

We 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).

Methods

Patients 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.

Results

Out 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.

Conclusions

When 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.

SUBMITTER: Jormalainen M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8860427 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

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

Jormalainen Mikko M Kesävuori Risto R Raivio Peter P Vento Antti A Mustonen Caius C Honkanen Hannu-Pekka HP Rosato Stefano S Simpanen Jarmo J Teittinen Kari K Biancari Fausto F Juvonen Tatu T

Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery 20220201 3

<h4>Objectives</h4>We 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).<h4>Methods</h4>Patients 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. ...[more]

PMID: 35188959

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere are few long-term mortality prediction studies after acute aortic dissection (AAD) Type A and none were performed using new models such as neural networks (NN) or support vector machines (SVM) which may show a higher discriminatory potency than standard multivariable models.MethodsWe used 32 risk factors identified by Literature search and previously assessed in short-term outcome investigations. Models were trained (50%) and validated (50%) on 2 random samples from a consecutive 235-patient cohort. NN were run only on patients with complete data for all included variables (N = 211); SVM on the overall group. Discrimination was assessed by receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) and Gini's coefficients along with classification performance.ResultsThere were 84 deaths (36%) occurring at 564 +/- 48 days (95%CI from 470 to 658 days). Patients with complete variables had a slightly lower death rate (60 of 211, 28%). NN classified 44 of 60 (73%) dead patients and 147 of 151 (97%) long-term survivors using 5 covariates: immediate post-operative chronic renal failure, circulatory arrest time, the type of surgery on ascending aorta plus hemi-arch, extracorporeal circulation time and the presence of Marfan habitus. Global accuracies of training and validation NN were excellent with AUC respectively 0.871 and 0.870 but classification errors were high among patients who died. Training SVM, using a larger number of covariates, showed no false negative or false positive cases among 118 randomly selected patients (error = 0%, AUC 1.0) whereas validation SVM, among 117 patients, provided 5 false negative and 11 false positive cases (error = 22%, AUC 0.821, p < 0.01 versus NN results). An html file was produced to adopt and manipulate the selected parameters for practical predictive purposes.ConclusionsBoth NN and SVM accurately selected a few operative and immediate post-operative factors and the Marfan habitus as long-term mortality predictors in AAD Type A. Although these factors were not new per se, their combination may be used in practice to index death risk post-operatively with good accuracy.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:The study objective was to evaluate the perioperative and long-term outcomes of aortic root repair and aortic root replacement and provide evidence for root management in acute type A aortic dissection. METHODS:From 1996 to 2017, 491 patients underwent aortic root repair (n = 307) or aortic root replacement (n = 184) (62% bioprosthesis) for acute type A aortic dissection. Indications for aortic root replacement were intimal tear at the aortic root, root measuring 4.5 cm or more, connective tissue disease, or unrepairable aortic valvulopathy. Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, long-term survival, and reoperation rate for root pathology. RESULTS:Patients' median age was 61 years and 56 years in the aortic root repair group and aortic root replacement group, respectively. The aortic root replacement group had more renal failure requiring dialysis, previous cardiac intervention or surgery, heart failure, coronary malperfusion syndrome, acute myocardial infarction, and severe aortic insufficiency, as well as concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting, tricuspid valve repair, and longer cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic crossclamp times but similar arch procedures. Perioperative outcomes were similar in the aortic root repair and aortic root replacement groups, including in-hospital mortality (8.5% and 8.2%), new-onset renal failure requiring permanent dialysis, stroke, myocardial infarction, and sepsis. Kaplan-Meier 10-year survival was 62% and 65%, and the 15-year cumulative incidence of reoperation was 11% and 7% in the aortic root repair and aortic root replacement groups, respectively. The primary indication for root reoperation was aortic root aneurysm in the aortic root repair group and bioprosthetic valve deterioration in the aortic root replacement group. CONCLUSIONS:Aortic root repair and aortic root replacement are appropriate surgical options for acute type A aortic dissection repair with favorable short- and long-term outcomes. Aortic root replacement should be performed for patients with acute type A aortic dissection presenting with an intimal tear at the aortic root, root aneurysm 4.5 cm or greater, connective tissue disease, or unrepairable aortic valvulopathy.

Project description:Background The treatment of chronic type B aortic dissection by thoracic endovascular aortic repair has some challenges, and its long-term outcomes remain unclear. This study aimed to analyze the 5-year clinical outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair of chronic type B aortic dissection, compare the differences between patients with and without adverse aortic events (AAEs), and identify risk factors for AAEs. Methods and Results Patients who underwent thoracic endovascular aortic repair of chronic type B aortic dissection from January 2009 to June 2017 were retrospectively enrolled. The primary end points were AAEs, including aorta-related death, procedural complications, and disease progression requiring reintervention. Clinical outcomes were described at the 5-year follow-up visit. The secondary end point was the comparison of the results between patients with and without AAEs. Univariable and multivariable logistic analyses were used to identify potential risk factors for AAEs. A total of 214 patients were enrolled. AAEs occurred in 46 (21.5%) patients. Compared with patients without AAEs, those with AAEs had higher rates of residual type A aortic dissection (26.1% versus 4.2%, P<0.001) and aortic diameter ≥5.5 cm (69.6% versus 11.3%, P<0.001), and a lower rate of complete false lumen thrombosis (23.9% versus 89.9%, P<0.001). Meanwhile, the median interval from symptom onset to intervention was longer in patients with AAEs (26 months versus 12 months, P=0.004). Partial or no false lumen thrombosis (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 14.71 [95% CI, 5.67-38.14; P<0.001]) and aortic diameter ≥5.5 cm (AOR, 10.16 [95% CI, 3.86-26.73; P<0.001]) were identified as independent risk factors for AAEs. Conclusions While thoracic endovascular aortic repair of chronic type B aortic dissection might be challenging in some cases, its long-term outcomes appeared promising as this treatment was effective in preventing catastrophic aortic events. Patients with AAEs showed higher rates of residual type A aortic dissection and aortic diameter ≥5.5 cm, a lower rate of complete false lumen thrombosis, and a longer median interval from symptom onset to intervention. Failure of complete false lumen thrombosis and an aortic diameter ≥5.5 cm were predictors of AAEs.

Dataset Information

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

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

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

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets