Impact of reduced left ventricular function on repairing acute type A aortic dissection: Outcome and risk factors analysis from a single institutional experience

Extracorporeal life support after surgical repair for acute type a aortic dissection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The use of extracorporeal life support (ECLS) in patients after surgical repair for acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) has not been well documented.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the outcomes of ECLS after surgery for ATAAD with data published by October 2023 in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guidelines. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023479955).

RESULTS

Twelve observational studies met our eligibility criteria, including 280 patients. Mean age was 55.0 years and women represented 25.3% of the overall population. Although the mean preoperative left ventricle ejection fraction was 59.8%, 60.8% of patients developed left ventricle failure and 34.0% developed biventricular failure. Coronary involvement and malperfusion were found in 37.1% and 25.6%, respectively. Concomitant coronary bypass surgery was performed in 38.5% of patients. Regarding ECLS, retrograde flow (femoral) was present in 39.9% and central cannulation was present in 35.4%. In-hospital mortality was 62.8% and pooled estimate of successful weaning was 50.8%. Neurological complications, bleeding and renal failure were found in 25.9%, 38.7%, and 65.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

ECLS after surgical repair for ATAAD remains associated with high rates of in-hospital death and complications, but it still represents a chance of survival in critical situations. ECLS remains a salvage attempt and surgeons should not try to avoid ECLS at all costs after repairing an ATAAD case.

TEM Classification of Aortic Dissection-The Evolving Scoring System: A Literature Review

Aortic dissection is an acute presentation that, if unnoticed, poses a significant risk to life. Anatomically, it is defined as a tear in the intimal layer of the aorta, but management differs significantly based on the location of this tear. Traditionally the Stanford and DeBakey classifications have been used to distinguish tear types and thus guide the most favourable management option, be it medical optimisation or surgery. Recently, a new Type-Entry-Malperfusion classification has been proposed to more accurately define and thus risk stratify patients with aortic dissection. This review summarises the Type-Entry-Malperfusion classification and highlights its potential advantages and limitations compared to other classifications. Clinical insights and potential barriers to adopting this classification are also described in this review.

Evaluation of Two Online Risk Prediction Models for the Mortality Rate of Acute Type A Aortic Dissection Surgery: The German Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection Type A Score and the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II

EuroSCORE II is one of the most widely utilized cardiovascular surgery risk scoring systems. Recently, a new online score calculator, namely the German Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection Type A (GERAADA), was launched to predict 30-day surgical mortality for acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate the predictive performance of these two scores. We calculated the two scores for 1346 ATAAD patients from January 2012 to December 2021. The overall performance was evaluated using Brier scores and Hosmer-Lemeshow statistics. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves were employed to assess diagnostic ability, and the standardized mortality ratio (SMR) was utilized to evaluate calibration. The GERAADA score and EuroSCORE II predicted 30-day mortality rates of 14.7% and 3.1%, respectively, while the observed rate was 12.5%. The predictive ability of EuroSCORE II (AUC 0.708, 95% CI: 0.664-0.792) was superior to that of the GERAADA score (0.648, 95% CI: 0.605-0.692). The GERAADA score had higher sensitivity but lower specificity than EuroSCORE II. And the GERAADA score may overestimate mortality (0.76, 95% CI: 0.65-0.89), while EuroSCORE II may underestimate the mortality rate (3.17, 95% CI: 2.92-3.44). The EuroSCORE II was superior in predicting surgical mortality among ATAAD patients. But the observed 30-day mortality rate certified a good calibration for the GERAADA score.

On-line risk prediction models for acute type A aortic dissection surgery: validation of the German Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection Type A score and the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II

OBJECTIVES

The German Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection Type A (GERAADA) on-line score calculator to predict 30-day mortality in patients undergoing surgery for acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) was recently launched. Using the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II (EuroSCORE II), it is also possible to predict operative mortality for the same type of surgery. The goal of our study was to validate the prediction accuracy of these 2 on-line risk prediction models.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data for EuroSCORE II risk factors as well as all data for GERAADA scoring were extracted from an institutional database for 147 patients who underwent surgery for ATAAD between April 2018 and April 2021. The discriminative power was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. The calibration of the models was tested by the Hosmer-Lemeshow statistics and by using the observed-to-expected (O/E) mortality ratio with the 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

The observed operative mortality was 14.3%. The mean predicted mortality rates for the GERAADA score and the EuroSCORE II were 15.6% and 10.6%, respectively. The EuroSCORE II discriminative power (area under the curve = 0.799) significantly outperformed the discriminatory power of the GERAADA score (area under the curve = 0.550). The Hosmer-Lemeshow statistics confirmed good calibration for both models (P-values of 0.49 and 0.29 for the GERAADA score and the EuroSCORE II, respectively). The O/E mortality ratio certified good calibration for both scores [GERAADA score (O/E ratio of 0.93, 95% confidence interval: 0.53-1.33); EuroSCORE II (O/E ratio of 1.35, 95% confidence interval: 0.77-1.93)].

CONCLUSIONS

The EuroSCORE II has better discriminative power for predicting operative mortality in ATAAD surgery than the GERAADA score. Both scores confirmed good calibration ability.

Short-term outcomes of acute coronary involvement in type A aortic dissection without myocardial ischemia: a multiple center retrospective cohort study

Background

To evaluate the early prognosis and management of acute coronary involvement (ACI) in type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) patients without myocardial ischemia (MI).

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study on a multicenter database. A total of 931 ATAAD patients without MI underwent thoracic aortic surgery between 2018 and 2019 in the Acute Aortic Syndrome Cooperation Network (AASCN) and were enrolled in our study. Patients were divided into two groups: ACI group and non-ACI group.

Results

There were 139 ACI patients (14.9%) and 792 non-ACI patients (85.1%) in our cohort. ACI group had higher 30-day mortality after surgery than non-ACI group (log-rank test: P = 0.028,Cox regression: hazard ratio [HR], 2.3; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.1–5.39; P = 0.047), especially in sub-group of advanced age (53–80 years; HR, 4.0; 95% CI, 1.3–12.8; P = 0.017), low diastolic blood pressure (29-69 mmHg, HR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.3–11.2; P = 0.018), low systolic blood pressure (51–119 mmHg, HR, 3.6; 95% CI, 1.1–12.4; P = 0.040), high body mass index (BMI;27.25–47.52 kg/m²; HR, 3.7; 95% CI, 1.3–10.7; P = 0.015) and high hemoglobin (>145 g/L; HR, 4.3; 95% CI, 1.2–16.0; P = 0.030). Acute renal failure was significant more in ACI group than non-ACI group (24.5% vs. 15.9%; P = 0.014).

Conclusions

ACI increases the short-term postoperative mortality and acute renal failure in ATAAD patients without MI. ATAAD patients with ACI may need a narrower control range of blood pressure even if without myocardial ischemia.

Trial registration

ChiCTR1900022637. Retrospectively registered 19 April 2019.

Surgical outcomes analysis in patients with uncomplicated acute type A aortic dissection: a 13-year institutional experience

This retrospective study aimed to clarify the short-term and mid-term outcomes of and prognostic factors for patients who underwent surgical repair for uncomplicated acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD). Between January 2007 and June 2019, 603 consecutive patients underwent ATAAD repair at our institution. According to patients’ preoperative presentations and imaging studies, uncomplicated ATAAD was found in 276 (45.8%) patients by excluding preoperative complicated factors. Patients with uncomplicated ATAAD were classified into the survivor (n = 243) and non-survivor (n = 33) groups. Clinical features, surgical information, and postoperative complications were compared. Three-year survival and freedom from reoperation rates for survivors were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier actuarial method. The in-hospital surgical mortality rate of uncomplicated ATAAD patients was 11.9%. The non-survivor group had a higher rate of postoperative malperfusion-related complications, and a multivariate analysis revealed that repeat surgery, retrograde cerebral perfusion, and intraoperative extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support were predictors of in-hospital mortality. In the survivor group, 3-year cumulative survival and freedom from aortic reoperation rates were 89.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 84.8–92.9%) and 83.1% (95% CI 76.8–87.7%), respectively. In conclusion, uncomplicated and complicated ATAAD rates were similar; the short-term and mid-term surgical outcomes in patients with uncomplicated ATAAD were generally acceptable.

Iatrogenic Aortic Dissection Associated With Cardiac Surgery: A Narrative Review

Iatrogenic aortic dissection (iAD) is a relatively rare but a life-threatening complication associated with cardiac surgery. All members of the team caring for cardiac surgical patients (surgeons, perfusionists, and anesthesiologists) must be familiar with this complication to minimize its incidence and improve outcome. The present narrative review focuses on iAD occurring intraoperatively and during the early postoperative period (within 1 month) of cardiac surgery. The review also addresses iAD that occurs late (beyond 1 month) after cardiac surgery and iAD associated with other procedures. iAD occurs in about 0.06% of cases when the ascending aorta is the site of arterial cannulation, in about 0.6% when the femoral or iliac arteries are used, and in about 0.5% when the axillary or subclavian arteries are used. Mortality is estimated to be 30% but is more than double if not recognized until the postoperative period. Site of origin of dissection is most commonly the arterial inflow cannula (∼33%). Other common sites are the aortic cross-clamp or partial occlusion clamp (∼29%) and the proximal saphenous vein anastomosis site (14%). Sixty percent of cases occur during coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and 17% during aortic valve surgery with or without CABG. iAD may be somewhat less common in off-pump versus on-pump CABG but is still not very rare. Risk factors, presentation, diagnosis, and management are reviewed in detail as is the key role of the use of echocardiography in the early diagnosis of iAD and for guiding its management.

Surgical rescues for critical hemopericardium complicated by acute type A aortic dissection: Emergent subxiphoid pericardiotomy or cardiopulmonary bypass first?

Background

Hemopericardium is a common and hazardous complication of acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD). This retrospective study aimed to clarify the short-term and mid-term outcomes in patients who underwent surgical rescues for hemopericardium complicated by ATAAD.

Methods

Between January 2007 and March 2019, 586 consecutive patients underwent ATAAD repair at our institution. According to preoperative computed tomography, hemopericardium was found in 191 patients (32.6%), 150 were stabilized with medical treatment, and 41 underwent surgical rescues for critical hemodynamics. The 41 patients were classified into groups according to their rescue procedures: emergent subxiphoid pericardiotomy (E-SXP group, n = 26, 63.4%) or emergent cardiopulmonary bypass (E-CPB group, n = 15, 36.6%). Clinical features, surgical information, postoperative complications, and 3-year survival were analyzed and compared.

Results

Demographics, comorbidities and aortic repair procedures were generally homogenous between the two groups, except for sex. The average systolic blood pressure was 62.4 ± 13.3 mmHg and 67.1 ± 13.1 mmHg in the E-SXP and E-CPB groups, respectively. A total of 29.3% of patients underwent cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) before surgical rescues. The in-hospital mortality was similar (30.8% versus 33.3%, P = 0.865) in the two groups. Multivariate analysis revealed that preoperative CPR was an in-hospital predictor of mortality. For patients who survived to discharge, 3-year cumulative survival rates were 87.8% ± 8.1% and 60.0% ± 19.7% in the E-SXP and E-CPB groups, respectively (P = 0.170).

Conclusions

Patients who underwent surgical rescues for ATAAD-complicated hemopericardium are at a high risk of in-hospital mortality. The two rescue procedures revealed similar short-term and mid-term outcomes.

Extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation in aortic surgery and dissection: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Very little is known about the role of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) for the management of patients undergoing major aortic surgery with particular reference to aortic dissection.

AIM

To review the available literature to determine if there was any evidence.

METHODS

A systematic literature search through PubMed and EMBASE was undertaken according to specific key words.

RESULTS

The search resulted in 29 publications relevant to the subject: 1 brief communication, 1 surgical technique report, 1 invited commentary, 1 retrospective case review, 1 observational study, 4 retrospective reviews, 13 case reports and 7 conference abstracts. A total of 194 patients were included in these publications of whom 77 survived.

CONCLUSION

Although there is no compelling evidence for or against the use of ECMO in major aortic surgery or dissection, it is enough to justify its use in this patient population despite current adverse attitude.