Outcomes after surgery for acute type A aortic dissection in “non-Marfan syndrome” patients with long life expectancy: A 24-year follow-up

Aortic arch surgery for DeBakey type 1 aortic dissection in patients aged 60 years or younger

BACKGROUND

Extended aortic repair is considered a key issue for the long-term durability of surgery for DeBakey type 1 aortic dissection. The risk of aortic degeneration may be higher in young patients due to their long life expectancy. The early outcome and durability of aortic surgery in these patients were investigated in the present study.

METHODS

The subjects of the present analysis were patients under 60 years old who underwent surgical repair for acute DeBakey type 1 aortic dissection at 18 cardiac surgery centres across Europe between 2005 and 2021. Patients underwent ascending aortic repair or total aortic arch repair using the conventional technique or the frozen elephant trunk technique. The primary outcome was 5-year cumulative incidence of reoperation on the distal aorta.

RESULTS

Overall, 915 patients underwent surgical ascending aortic repair and 284 patients underwent surgical total aortic arch repair. The frozen elephant trunk procedure was performed in 128 patients. Among 245 propensity score-matched pairs, total aortic arch repair did not decrease the rate of distal aortic reoperation compared to ascending aortic repair (5-year cumulative incidence, 6.7% versus 6.7%, subdistributional hazard ratio 1.127, 95% c.i. 0.523 to 2.427). Total aortic arch repair increased the incidence of postoperative stroke/global brain ischaemia (25.7% versus 18.4%, P = 0.050) and dialysis (19.6% versus 12.7%, P = 0.003). Five-year mortality was comparable after ascending aortic repair and total aortic arch repair (22.8% versus 27.3%, P = 0.172).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients under 60 years old with DeBakey type 1 aortic dissection, total aortic arch replacement compared with ascending aortic repair did not reduce the incidence of distal aortic operations at 5 years. When feasible, ascending aortic repair for DeBakey type 1 aortic dissection is associated with satisfactory early and mid-term outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04831073.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures Used to Assess Quality of Life in Aortic Dissection: a Systematic Scoping Review using COSMIN Methodology

OBJECTIVE

To systematically identify all patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) (quality of life [QOL] instruments or other instrument/methodology) that have been used to date in aortic dissection (AD) and to explore how well these instruments evaluate QOL according to the Consensus based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology or guideline.

DATA SOURCES

Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library were search on 1st July 2022.

REVIEW METHODS

This scoping review was undertaken according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) and the COSMIN guidelines for performing systematic reviews of validated PROMs. Studies that reported on any aspect or domain of QOL using a PROM or other instrument or methodology on AD were included. Data synthesis, including psychometric property analysis and risk of bias assessment were performed according to COSMIN guidelines.

RESULTS

Forty-five studies, published between 1994 and 2021 reporting on 5 874 patients (mean age 63 years, 70.6% male), were included. A total of 39 PROMs were used, and three studies used semi-structured interviews. The majority (69%) of studies were in patients with type A aortic dissection (TAAD). The most common PROM used was the SF-36 (51%). Six studies evaluated one or more psychometric properties of a PROM. Only one of these studies was specifically designed as a validation study. No study reported on content validity. Internal consistency was the most evaluated psychometric property. No study evaluated all the psychometric properties according to COSMIN methodology. The methodological quality used to assess these PROMs was judged to be adequate or very good.

CONCLUSION

This review highlights the heterogeneity of PROMs or methods used to determine QOL in AD patients. The lack of research regarding a comprehensive evaluation of the psychometric properties of a PROM used in AD highlights the need for the development and validation of a dissection specific PROM. [PROSPERO registration no. CRD42022310477].

Quality of life: modified triple-branched stent graft implantation versus frozen elephant trunk technique

Objective

To compare the effects of modified triple-branched stent implantation and frozen elephant trunk technique on the quality of life (QoL) of acute Stanford Type A aortic dissection (AAAD) patients at different follow-up times.

Methods

Data from 175 AAAD survivors was collected which were divided into two groups according to different surgical techniques: (group A): modified triple-branched stent graft implantation; (group B): frozen elephant trunk. The SF-36 were used to assess the QoL at discharge (AD), the third postoperative month (POM3), and the twelfth postoperative month (POM12).

Results

(1) The total scores at each time of both groups showed lower than the normal level; Group A scored higher than group B at some time points in terms of some items (role physical, role emotion and mental health; all P = 0.000), and some items at POM3 or POM12 scored higher than at discharge (role physical, social function; both P = 0.000). (2) There were less patients with heavy self-perceived burden in group A than group B at discharge (P = 0.032) and patients with heavy self-perceived burden decreased over time. (3) Young postoperative AAD patients (P = 0.002) in group B (P = 0.005) with heavy self-perceived burden (P = 0.000), acute renal failure (P = 0.008), long LOS (P = 0.026) and blood loss (> 1000 mL/24 h) (P = 0.039) seemed to get a worse QoL.

Conclusion

The impact on QoL of the modified triple-branched stent graft implantation technique seemed to be better than those of frozen elephant trunk surgery in role physical, role emotion and mental health.

Factors Affecting Outcomes in Acute Type A Aortic Dissection: A Systematic Review

Acute type A aortic dissection is a clinical emergency and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality rates if not managed promptly in specialised and high-volume centres. The mortality rate is increased by 1% for each hour delay in management; however, with advancement in clinical practice, diagnostic imaging and clinician awareness, this has been dramatically reduced to below 30% in most international centres. Not only timing of recognition of the pathology, but also other factors can significantly affect outcomes of such critical pathology. This includes, but is not limited to, age, extent of the pathology, existence of connective tissue disorders, hypertension, diabetes mellitus and surgeon experience. This narrative review will focus on current clinical practice and the evidence behind optimising each factor to minimise adverse outcomes in such high-risk cohort.

Outcomes of Early-Onset Acute Type A Aortic Dissection - Influence of Etiologic Factors

BACKGROUND

Outcomes of early-onset acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) associated with Marfan syndrome (MFS) are known, but not with other etiologies. Methods and Results: ATAAD patients from 2 centers (n=1,001) were divided into 2 groups: age ≤45 years (n=93) and age >45 years (n=908). Although in-hospital death and 10-year survival were similar (12% vs. 7% and 62.6% vs. 67.3%), the 10-year aortic event-free survival differed (50.0% vs. 80.2%; P<0.01). ATAAD patients from 3 centers (n=132), all aged ≤45 years, were divided into 5 groups: lone hypertension (HTN, n=71), MFS (n=23), non-syndromic familial thoracic aortic aneurysm and dissection (NS-FTAAD, n=16), bicuspid aortic valve (BAV, n=11), and no known etiologic factor (n=11). The incidence of severe aortic insufficiency varied between groups (HTN: 11%, MFS: 39%, NS-FTAAD: 38%, BAV: 55%, no known factor: 46%; P<0.01), whereas in-hospital death did not (14%, 22%, 0%, 0%, and 9%; P=0.061). The 10-year survival was 52.2%, 64.7%, 83.6%, 100%, and 90.9%, respectively, and 10-year aortic event-free survival was 55.6%, 36.3%, 77.5%, 90.0%, and 30.0%. Median descending aorta growth (mm/year) was 1.1 (0.1-3.4), 2.3 (0.3-5.3), 1.9 (1.3-2.7), 0.9 (-0.1-2.0), and 1.0 (-0.2-2.9) (P=0.15), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Late aortic events are common in young ATAAD patients. Known etiologic factors, though not BAV, negatively influence late outcomes in these patients.

Debranching of Supra-aortic Vessels via Femoral Artery Inflow for Late Ascending Aortic Rupture

A 56-year-old man with a history of Marfan's syndrome, total arch replacement, descending thoracic endovascular aortic repair, and twice redo sternotomy for pseudoaneurysm repair, presented with a pulsatile chest mass secondary to a contained rupture of the ascending aorta. The patient underwent supra-aortic debranching via the superficial femoral artery and ascending thoracic stent-graft placement under continuous transesophageal echocardiography. Completion angiography demonstrated successful exclusion of the contained rupture. Postoperatively, the patient was neurologically intact, the pulsatile mass resolved, and the bypass grafts remained patent. Chronic respiratory failure and multidrug-resistant pneumonia led to late mortality. This case demonstrates that hybrid repair is effective in the emergent setting of ascending aortic rupture. Debranching of the ascending arch using the superficial femoral artery as inflow is feasible and provides adequate cerebral perfusion despite the length of the bypass. The use of transesophageal echocardiography during stent-graft deployment allows precise device placement in the high-risk area of the ascending aorta proximal to the innominate artery.