Hemiarch versus extended arch repair for acute type A dissection: Results from a multicenter national registry.

OBJECTIVE: We compared perioperative outcomes of patients with acute type A aortic dissection undergoing hemiarch (HA) versus extended arch (EA) repair with or without descending aortic intervention. METHODS: Nine hundred twenty-nine patients underwent acute type A aortic dissection repair (2002-2021, 9 centers) including open distal repair (HA) with or without additional EA repair. EA with intervention on the descending aorta (EAD) included elephant trunk, antegrade thoracic endovascular aortic replacement, or uncovered dissection stent. EA with no descending intervention (EAND), included unstented suture-only methods. Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, permanent neurologic deficit, computed tomography malperfusion resolution, and a composite. Multivariable logistic regression was also performed. RESULTS: Mean age was 66 ± 18 years, 30% (278 out of 929) were women, and HA was performed more frequently (75% [n = 695]) than EA (25% [n = 234]). EAD techniques included: dissection stent (39 out of 234 [17%]), thoracic endovascular aortic replacement (18 out of 234 [7.7%]), and elephant trunk (87 out of 234 [37%]). In-hospital mortality (EA: n = 49 [21%] and HA: n = 129 [19%]; P = .42), and neurological deficit (EA: n = 43 [18%] and HA: n = 121 [17%]; P = .74) were similar. EA was not independently associated with death (EA vs HA odds ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.77-1.54; P = .63) or neurologic deficit (EA vs HA odds ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.47-1.55; P = .59). Composite adverse events differed significantly (EA vs HA odds ratio, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.16-1.87; P = .001). Malperfusion resolved more frequently after EAD (EAD: n = 32 [80%], EAND: n = 18 [56%], HA: n = 71 [50%]; P = .004), although multivariable analysis was not significant (EAD vs HA odds ratio, 2.17; 95% CI, 0.83-5.66; P = .10). CONCLUSIONS: Extended arch interventions pose similar perioperative mortality and neurologic risks as Hemiarch. Descending aortic reinforcement may promote malperfusion restoration. Extended techniques should be approached with caution in acute dissection due to increased risk of adverse events.

Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis and Small Aortic Annulus: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment in patients with severe aortic stenosis and small aortic annulus (SAA) remains to be determined. This study aimed to compare the hemodynamic and clinical outcomes between transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with a SAA. METHODS: This prospective multicenter international randomized trial was performed in 15 university hospitals. Participants were 151 patients with severe aortic stenosis and SAA (mean diameter <23 mm) randomized (1:1) to TAVR (n=77) versus SAVR (n=74). The primary outcome was impaired valve hemodynamics (ie, severe prosthesis patient mismatch or moderate-severe aortic regurgitation) at 60 days as evaluated by Doppler echocardiography and analyzed in a central echocardiography core laboratory. Clinical events were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: The mean age of the participants was 75.5±5.1 years, with 140 (93%) women, a median Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality of 2.50% (interquartile range, 1.67%-3.28%), and a median annulus diameter of 21.1 mm (interquartile range, 20.4-22.0 mm). There were no differences between groups in the rate of severe prosthesis patient mismatch (TAVR, 4 [5.6%]; SAVR, 7 [10.3%]; P=0.30) and moderate-severe aortic regurgitation (none in both groups). No differences were found between groups in mortality rate (TAVR, 1 [1.3%]; SAVR, 1 [1.4%]; P=1.00) and stroke (TAVR, 0; SAVR, 2 [2.7%]; P=0.24) at 30 days. After a median follow-up of 2 (interquartile range, 1-4) years, there were no differences between groups in mortality rate (TAVR, 7 [9.1%]; SAVR, 6 [8.1%]; P=0.89), stroke (TAVR, 3 [3.9%]; SAVR, 3 [4.1%]; P=0.95), and cardiac hospitalization (TAVR, 15 [19.5%]; SAVR, 15 [20.3%]; P=0.80). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe aortic stenosis and SAA (women in the majority), there was no evidence of superiority of contemporary TAVR versus SAVR in valve hemodynamic results. After a median follow-up of 2 years, there were no differences in clinical outcomes between groups. These findings suggest that the 2 therapies represent a valid alternative for treating patients with severe aortic stenosis and SAA, and treatment selection should likely be individualized according to baseline characteristics, additional anatomical risk factors, and patient preference. However, the results of this study should be interpreted with caution because of the limited sample size leading to an underpowered study, and need to be confirmed in future larger studies. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03383445.

Late Outcome of a Left-Atrial-to-Coronary-Sinus Shunt.

Frail patients with severe calcific mitral stenosis have few treatment options. We present a novel case successfully treated with a left-atrial-to-coronary-sinus shunt. However, the patient's symptoms returned, and, at surgery, the shunt was found to be occluded and associated with left atrial and ventricular fibrosis and calcification. (Level of Difficulty: Intermediate.).

Utility of a smartphone application in assessing palmar circulation prior to radial artery harvesting for coronary artery bypass grafting: rationale and design of the randomised CAPITAL iRADIAL-CABG trial.

INTRODUCTION: There is emerging evidence supporting the use of the radial artery (RA) as a preferred secondary conduit for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) as it is associated with higher rates of graft patency at 5 years when compared with saphenous vein grafts (SVG). The modified Allen's test (MAT) is traditionally regarded as the standard of care in the assessment of ulnar artery (UA) patency prior to RA harvesting. Unfortunately, due to high false-positive rates, a substantial number of pre-CABG patients are found to have an abnormal MAT despite normal UA patency, resulting in inappropriate exclusion from RA harvesting. The SVG is generally used in its place when this occurs, resulting in potentially lower rates of long-term graft patency. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The CAPITAL iRADIAL-CABG trial is currently enrolling participants 18 years of age or older undergoing CABG for whom the treating physician is considering the use of an RA conduit. Eligible patients will be randomised in a 1:1 fashion to MAT or smartphone-based photoplethysmography application assessment to assess collateral palmar circulation prior to RA harvesting. The primary outcome of the trial is the use of the RA as a conduit during CABG. The primary safety outcome is postoperative palmar ischaemia as determined by clinical assessment or requirement of vascular intervention. Secondary outcomes include vascular complications, early graft failure, need for rescue percutaneous coronary intervention during the index hospitalisation and a composite cardiovascular outcome of myocardial infarction, stroke and cardiovascular death prior to discharge from hospital. A total of 236 participants are planned to be recruited. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Ottawa Heart Science Network Research Ethics Board (approval number 20180865-01H). The study results will be disseminated via conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03810729.

Moderate to Severe Acute Kidney Injury Leads to Worse Outcomes in Complex Thoracic Aortic Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The impact of acute kidney injury (AKI) in thoracic aortic surgery is not well defined. This study aimed to examine the impact of varying severity of AKI on in-hospital and long-term outcome in these patients. METHODS: From 2004 to 2018, 1142 patients underwent thoracic aortic surgery at a single institution (University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ottawa, Canada) and were stratified into 4 groups on the basis of the severity of postoperative AKI: no AKI (n = 705), Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) stage 1 (n = 261), AKIN stage 2 (n = 72), and AKIN stage 3 (n = 104). Outcomes include in-hospital mortality, morbidity, and long-term survival. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of AKI. Propensity score matching was performed to identify pairs of patients without postoperative AKI or with AKIN stage 1 AKI, as well as pairs of patients without postoperative AKI and those with AKIN stage 2 or higher AKI. Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted for late survival. RESULTS: In the propensity-matched cohort, patients with postoperative AKIN stage I AKI had worse in-hospital mortality but comparable long-term survival when compared with patients without postoperative AKI. Patients with AKIN stage 2 or higher AKI experienced significantly higher in-hospital mortality compared with patients without postoperative AKI (15.9% vs 4.6%; P < .01) and worse 8-year survival (65.9% ± 34.1% vs 80.1% ± 20.0%; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Moderate to severe AKI is a serious complication and is associated with significantly worse short- and long-term outcomes; targeting mild AKI with therapeutic intervention is an important step in improving patient outcomes.

Perioperative and Long-Term Morbidity and Mortality for Elderly Patients Undergoing Thoracic Aortic Surgery.

The impact of age on outcome in elective thoracic aortic surgery is not well characterized. We aim to evaluate age-related differences in short- and long-term outcomes in elderly patients undergoing elective thoracic aortic surgery. From 2004 to 2018, 786 patients underwent elective thoracic aortic surgery at a single center and were divided into 2 groups; <75 years old (n = 651) and ≥75 years old (n = 135). Outcomes include in-hospital mortality, morbidity, and long-term survival. Median follow-up was 4.8 years. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of mortality and morbidity; Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted for late survival. Similar analysis was performed to the propensity-matched cohort. The elderly cohort had higher in-hospital mortality (8.2% vs 1.7%; P < 0.01), stroke (11.9 vs 2.8%; P< 0.01) and prolonged ventilation (17.3% vs 8.3%; P < 0.01), and intensive care unit stay (5.6 ± 10.9 vs 2.9 ± 6.0 days; P < 0.01). After adjusting for baseline differences and surgical complexity, age ≥75 years remained a significant predictor of hospital mortality (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 3.7 [1.3-10.3]). Eight-year survival was 75.4 ± 7.7% in the older group compared to 93.3 ± 1.9% in the younger group (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]: 4.2 [1.7-11.0]). Propensity score-matched analysis also confirmed worse early- and long-term outcomes in the elderly group. Elderly patients experience higher in-hospital mortality and morbidity following elective thoracic aortic surgery compared to their younger counterparts and have a higher burden of mortality over long-term follow-up.

Aortic Stenosis and Small Aortic Annulus.

The presence of a small aortic annulus poses a considerable challenge in the management of patients with severe aortic stenosis, especially in elderly women, where it is a very frequent finding. The optimal approach for treating these patients remains controversial, and several surgical strategies such as aortic root enlargement, supra-annular stented prosthetic valves, stentless bioprosthesis, and sutureless bioprostheses have been proposed to improve valve hemodynamics and clinical outcomes. More recently, transcatheter aortic valve replacement has emerged as a valid alternative for the treatment of aortic stenosis and excellent valve hemodynamic results have been observed among patients with a small aortic annulus. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the current definition, prevalence, and clinical impact of small aortic annulus in patients with aortic stenosis, and evaluate the different therapeutic strategies currently available to improve valve hemodynamics and outcomes in this population.

Transcaval Valve-in-Valve-in-Valve Aortic Valve Replacement for Bioprosthetic Valve Degeneration.

A 74-year-old man presented with progressive dyspnea on exertion. History included peripheral arterial disease and coronary artery bypass grafting with aortic valve replacement 12 years ago. Subsequently, the surgical valve developed severe stenosis and moderate insufficiency. He underwent a transapical valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement 5 years before presentation. This second valve developed a mean gradient of 66 mm Hg with mild insufficiency. The patient was treated with a third aortic valve using an alternative transcaval approach, significantly alleviating his symptoms.

Aortic valve insufficiency in aortic root aneurysms: consider every valve for repair.

Aortic valve (AV) preservation and repair is emerging as an attractive alternative to AV replacement in younger patients with aortic insufficiency (AI) and aortic root aneurysms. AV repair mitigates some of the risks associated with prosthetic valves. More centers are reporting the safety of AV preservation and repair and favorable short- and long-term outcomes. However, further work is needed to improve long-term repair durability and dissemination of knowledge and technique to make AV repair the gold standard in this patient population.

Impact of visualization on simulation training for vascular anastomosis.

OBJECTIVE: There is mounting evidence supporting the benefit of surgical simulation on the learning of skills independently and in a patient-safe environment. The objective of this study was to examine the effect of visualization of surgical steps via instructional media on performance of an end-to-side microvascular anastomosis. METHODS: Thirty-two first- and second-year surgical trainees from the University of Ottawa received an expert-guided, didactic lecture on vascular anastomosis and performed an end-to-side anastomosis on a procedural model to assess baseline skills. Assessments were performed by 2 blinded, expert observers using validated measurements of skill. Subjects were then proctored to perform anastomoses using the model. Subjects were then randomized to watch an instructional video on performance of vascular anastomosis using visualization as the education strategy. One week later, subjects were again assessed for technical skill on the model. The primary outcome was the score achieved on the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill (OSATS) scale. Secondary outcomes included an anastomosis-specific End-Product Rating Score and time to completion. RESULTS: Compared with residents who received expert-guided simulator training alone, those who used the supplementary multimedia scored significantly greater on OSATS (17.4 ± 2.9 vs 14.2 ± 3.2, P = .0013) and on End-Product Rating Score (11.24 ± 3.0 vs 7.4 ± 4.1, P = .011). However, performance time did not differ between groups (15.7 vs 14.3 minutes, P = .79). CONCLUSIONS: Residents with supplemental instructional media performed an end-to-side anastomosis more proficiently as assessed by OSATS and with a greater quality end-product. This suggests that both didactic simulation training as well as use of visualization multimedia improves learning and performance of vascular anastomosis and should be incorporated into surgical curricula.

Treatment of the Chronic Type B Aortic Dissection: The Pro-endovascular Argument.

Although thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is the standard of care in acute complicated type B dissections, its role in chronic type B dissections remains controversial. This controversy stems from anatomical differences between acute and chronic dissections, such as a thicker intimal clap and improved results in descending aortic replacement. However, despite these important differences, there has been accumulating evidence on the safety and efficacy of TEVAR in chronic type B aortic dissections, especially when considering the alternative of open surgical repair, which is associated with significantly higher morbidity and in many hands also higher mortality. Herein, we discuss the evidence in the literature highlighting TEVAR's safety and efficacy in this setting.