When is laparotomy for mesenteric ischemia after aortic dissection futile?

BACKGROUND: Tissue necrosis from persistent mesenteric ischemia after aortic dissection may progress to sepsis and death without emergent laparotomy. However, the signs of mesenteric necrosis are common in patients experiencing non-survivable multisystem failure after aortic catastrophe. No study has yet examined when and whether laparotomy offers a chance for meaningful survival in these patients. METHODS: A total of 145 patients treated for acute Type A or Type B aortic dissection with mesenteric ischemia were identified from a single institution from 2006 to 2022. Of those, 29 underwent laparotomy all for compelling clinical indication. Detailed clinical characteristics were studied with respect to short and long-term outcomes in these patients. RESULTS: Among laparotomy patients, 45% (13/29) survived to discharge compared to 71% (103/145) of all mesenteric malperfusion patients. Serum lactate and arterial pH were both very strongly associated with survival after laparotomy. Among survivors and non-survivors, mean lactate prior to laparotomy was 6.3 mmol/L vs 13.4 mmol/L (p=0.024) and pH was 7.39 vs 7.20 (p<0.001). In particular, lactate over 8 mmol/L (OR [95%CI] = 16.5 [2.0-192], p=0.003) and pH under 7.30 (OR [95%CI] = 14.4 [1.87-128], p=0.003) were highly predictive of mortality. Survival to discharge after laparotomy for patients with both severe lactatemia and severe acidosis (defined above) was 9% (1/11) compared to 90% (9/10) for patients with neither severe lactatemia nor acidosis. CONCLUSIONS: The degree of lactic acidosis can very effectively identify patients for whom laparotomy is futile and those for whom it is not after aortic dissection with mesenteric ischemia.

Long-Term Outcomes of Antegrade Thoracic Stent Grafting During Repair of Acute DeBakey I Dissection.

BACKGROUND: We aim to evaluate the impact of antegrade stenting of the distal arch and proximal descending aorta combined with non-total arch procedures in acute type A aortic dissection. METHODS: From 2005 to 2022, 733 non-syndromic patients presented with acute DeBakey type I aortic dissection and underwent non total arch procedure. Ninety-five patients underwent antegrade stenting and 638 did not. Propensity-score analysis was performed, and 95 optimal pairs were created. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and cumulative incidence of reintervention with death as a competing event was calculated and compared using Gray's method. RESULTS: Survival estimates at 10 years after propensity score matching were similar between both group 58.9% (95%CI: 46.5-74.5) versus 58.4% (95%CI: 48.3-70.6) (p=0.6) in the non-stented versus stented group respectively. Cumulative incidence of reintervention with competing risk of death at 10 years after propensity matching was 27% (95%CI: 17-37) versus 22% (95%CI: 14-32) (p=0.44). CONCLUSIONS: Antegrade TEVAR may be beneficial for remodeling and facilitating future endovascular reinterventions and reduces the occurence of reintervention for malperfusion.

Descending Thoracic and Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repairs - The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary national outcomes of open and endovascular aortic repair for descending thoracic (DTAA) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA) are unclear. We evaluated this using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database (STS-ACSD). METHODS: From 07/01/2017 to 6/30/2022, we identified 3522 adults undergoing planned DTAA repair (open 328, endovascular 1895) or TAAA repair (open 870, endovascular 429), after excluding ascending aorta or aortic arch aneurysms (zone 0, 1, or 2), interventions with a proximal extent in zone 0 or zone 1, juxtarenal/infrarenal aortic interventions, hybrid procedures, aortic trauma, and aortic infection. RESULTS: Most DTAA interventions (85.2%) were endovascular repairs, while most TAAA interventions were open repairs (66.9%). For DTAA, the operative mortality, permanent stroke rate, and rate of spinal cord injury were 4.2%, 3.8%, and 2.4% for endovascular repair and 9.2%, 8.5%, and 4.6% for open repair, respectively (all p<0.05). For TAAA, the operative mortality, permanent stroke rate, and rate of spinal cord injury were 6.5%, 2.1%, and 3.0% for endovascular repair and 11.7%, 6.0%, and 12.2% for open repair (all p<0.05). Increasing annual open TAAA repair volume was associated with lower odds of experiencing the composite of operative mortality, permanent stroke, or spinal cord injury. CONCLUSIONS: Based on STS-ACSD data, endovascular repair was the predominant approach for treating DTAA, while most patients undergoing TAAA interventions had an open surgical repair. Outcome differences between open and endovascular approaches may be related to patient selection. Increasing center experience with open TAAA repair is associated with improved outcomes.

Longitudinal Outcomes of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for Ruptured Thoracic Aortic Aneurysms.

OBJECTIVES: Limited data exist on long-term mortality and reintervention rates of emergent thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysm (rTAA). This study aimed to characterize the long-term outcomes of emergent TEVAR for rTAA. METHODS: This study reviewed all TEVARs for emergent rTAA and elective intact thoracic aortic aneurysms (iTAA) from August 2005 to March 2022 at a large academic medical center. Outcomes, including overall survival and reinterventions, were considered over eight years. RESULTS: Of 321 patients, 65 received TEVAR for rTAA (34 hemodynamically stable) and 256 for iTAA. Respective mean (SD) ages were 74.4 (11.9) and 74.7 (9.1) years. Median follow-up was 5.1 years. rTAA patients had lower 30-day survival (69.2% vs 96.9%, P < .001) and higher rates of stroke, pneumonia, and prolonged ventilation (all P ≤ .01). Survival was significantly worse for rTAA at 1 year (46% vs 86%), 5 years (27% vs 48%), and 8 years (20% vs 32%; all P < .001). For patients surviving at least 90 days, the long-term survival difference narrowed to statistical insignificance. Ruptured aneurysms required more reinterventions within 30 days, but comparable long-term reintervention rates. Indications for reintervention were similar, with type I endoleak as the leading cause. Long-term survival for hemodynamically stable rTAA patients did not differ significantly from iTAA patients (49% vs 48% at 5 years). CONCLUSIONS: Short-to-medium-term outcomes are worse for ruptured aneurysms. However, long-term survival of hemodynamically stable rTAA patients and rTAA patients who survive the first 90 days are comparable to iTAA patients.

Performance of the open-first repair strategy in type A aortic dissection with mesenteric malperfusion syndrome eligible for delayed repair.

OBJECTIVE: For patients with type A aortic dissection complicated by mesenteric malperfusion syndrome, some centers advocate a nontraditional approach based on up-front endovascular intervention and delayed open repair. However, the efficacy of this strategy cannot be understood without first understanding outcomes of the traditional open-first strategy in the same select patient population eligible for delayed repair, applying modern techniques of hybrid aortic surgery. METHODS: Patients with acute type A aortic dissection and mesenteric malperfusion syndrome were queried from a single institution. Those presenting with aortic rupture, tamponade, or cardiogenic shock (ineligible for delayed repair) were excluded. Patients were managed with immediate open aortic repair. Short-term and long-term outcomes are reported. RESULTS: A total of 1228 patients were treated for acute type A dissection in the study period, of whom 77 were included in the mesenteric malperfusion syndrome cohort. In-hospital mortality was 29% compared with 39% in an identically selected mesenteric malperfusion syndrome population undergoing delayed repair reported previously. Among patients with mesenteric malperfusion syndrome, 32% underwent additional procedures addressing distal malperfusion in a hybrid operating room during or after open repair. Concomitant proximal malperfusion (coronary, cerebral, or upper extremity) was common in the mesenteric malperfusion syndrome cohort, present in 35% of cases. Although early mortality was greater in the mesenteric malperfusion syndrome cohort compared with all acute type A dissections, 10-year survival among those discharged alive was similar (65% vs 59%, P = .18). CONCLUSIONS: The traditional open-first repair strategy performs equal to or better than the delayed repair strategy for patients with mesenteric malperfusion syndrome eligible for delayed repair.

Transcatheter heart valve explant with infective endocarditis-associated prosthesis failure and outcomes: the EXPLANT-TAVR international registry.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Surgical explantation of transcatheter heart valves (THVs) is rapidly increasing, but there are limited data on patients with THV-associated infective endocarditis (IE). This study aims to assess the outcomes of patients undergoing THV explant for IE. METHODS: All patients who underwent THV explant between 2011 and 2022 from 44 sites in the EXPLANT-TAVR registry were identified. Patients with IE as the reason for THV explant were compared to those with other mechanisms of bioprosthetic valve dysfunction (BVD). RESULTS: A total of 372 patients from the EXPLANT-TAVR registry were included. Among them, 184 (49.5%) patients underwent THV explant due to IE and 188 (50.5%) patients due to BVD. At the index transcatheter aortic valve replacement, patients undergoing THV explant for IE were older (74.3 ± 8.6 vs. 71 ± 10.6 years) and had a lower Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score [2.6% (1.8-5.0) vs. 3.3% (2.1-5.6), P = .029] compared to patients with BVD. Compared to BVD, IE patients had longer intensive care unit and hospital stays (P < .05) and higher stroke rates at 30 days (8.6% vs. 2.9%, P = .032) and 1 year (16.2% vs. 5.2%, P = .010). Adjusted in-hospital, 30-day, and 1-year mortality was 12.1%, 16.1%, and 33.8%, respectively, for the entire cohort, with no significant differences between groups. Although mortality was numerically higher in IE patients 3 years postsurgery (29.6% for BVD vs. 43.9% for IE), Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant differences between groups (P = .16). CONCLUSIONS: In the EXPLANT-TAVR registry, patients undergoing THV explant for IE had higher 30-day and 1-year stroke rates and longer intensive care unit and hospital stays. Moreover, patients undergoing THV explant for IE had a higher 3-year mortality rate, which did not reach statistical significance given the relatively small sample size of this unique cohort and the reduced number of events.

Impact of nondiameter aortic indices on surgical eligibility: Results from the Treatment in Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm: Surgery Versus Surveillance (TITAN: SvS) randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Traditional criterion for intervention on an asymptomatic ascending aortic aneurysm has been a maximal aortic diameter of 5.5 cm or more. The 2022 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association aortic guidelines adopted cross-sectional aortic area/height ratio, aortic size index, and aortic height index as alternate parameters for surgical intervention. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of using these newer indices on patient eligibility for surgical intervention in a prospective, multicenter cohort with moderate-sized ascending aortic aneurysms between 5.0 and 5.4 cm. METHODS: Patients enrolled from 2018 to 2023 in the randomization or registry arms of the multicenter trial, Treatment In Thoracic Aortic aNeurysm: Surgery versus Surveillance, were included in the study. Clinical data were captured prospectively in an online database. Imaging data were derived from a core computed laboratory. RESULTS: Among the 329 included patients, 20% were female. Mean age was 65.0 ± 11.6 years, and mean maximal aortic diameter was 50.8 ± 3.9 mm. In the one-third of all patients (n = 109) who met any 1 of the 3 criteria (ie, aortic size index ≥3.08 cm/m2, aortic height index ≥3.21 cm/m, or cross-sectional aortic area/height ≥ 10 cm2/m), their mean maximal aortic diameter was 52.5 ± 0.52 mm. Alternate criteria were most commonly met in women compared with men: 20% versus 2% for aortic size index (P < .001), 39% versus 5% for aortic height index (P < .001), and 39% versus 21% for cross-sectional aortic area/height (P = .002), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: One-third of patients in Treatment In Thoracic Aortic aNeurysm: Surgery versus Surveillance would meet criteria for surgical intervention based on novel parameters versus the classic definition of diameter 5.5 cm or more. Surgical thresholds for aortic size index, aortic height index, or cross-sectional aortic area/height ratio are more likely to be met in female patients compared with male patients.

Axillary vs Femoral Arterial Cannulation in Acute Type A Dissection: International Multicenter Data.

BACKGROUND: Cannulation strategy in acute type A dissection (ATAD) varies widely without known gold standards. This study compared ATAD outcomes of axillary vs femoral artery cannulation in a large cohort from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD). METHODS: The study retrospectively reviewed 2145 patients from the IRAD Interventional Cohort (1996-2021) who underwent ATAD repair with axillary or femoral cannulation (axillary group: n = 1106 [52%]; femoral group: n = 1039 [48%]). End points included the following: early mortality; neurologic, respiratory, and renal complications; malperfusion; and tamponade. All outcomes are presented as axillary with respect to femoral. RESULTS: The proportion of patients younger than 70 years in both groups was similar (n = 1577 [74%]), as were bicuspid aortic valve, Marfan syndrome, and previous dissection. Patients with femoral cannulation had slightly more aortic insufficiency (408 [55%] vs 429 [60%]; P = .058) and coronary involvement (48 [8%] vs 70 [13%]; P = .022]. Patients with axillary cannulation underwent more total aortic arch (156 [15%] vs 106 [11%]; P = .02) and valve-sparing root replacements (220 [22%] vs 112 [12%]; P < .001). More patients with femoral cannulation underwent commissural resuspension (269 [30.9%] vs 324 [35.3%]; P = .05). Valve replacement rates were not different. The mean duration of cardiopulmonary bypass was longer in the femoral group (190 [149-237] minutes vs 196 [159-247] minutes; P = .037). In-hospital mortality was similar between the axillary (n = 165 [15%]) and femoral (n = 149 [14%]) groups (P = .7). Furthermore, there were no differences in stroke, visceral ischemia, tamponade, respiratory insufficiency, coma, or spinal cord ischemia. CONCLUSIONS: Axillary cannulation is associated with a more stable ATAD presentation, but it is a more extensive intervention compared with femoral cannulation. Both procedures have equivalent early mortality, stroke, tamponade, and malperfusion outcomes after statistical adjustment.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement achieves similar predicted effective orifice area to surgical aortic valve replacement in bicuspid aortic stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Studies comparing transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement (TAVR and SAVR) for patients with trileaflet aortic stenosis (AS) have found similar or larger effective orifice area (EOA) for TAVR prostheses. To our knowledge, no studies have compared EOA in patients undergoing TAVR versus SAVR for bicuspid AS. METHODS: We retrospectively compared prosthetic valvular sizing and predicted EOA for patients with bicuspid AS undergoing TAVR or SAVR at our institution between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2021. We excluded patients undergoing procedures for indications other than AS and those without a pre-procedural gated Chest CT. Comparisons included demographics, comorbidities, annular size, prosthetic valve size, predicted EOA and prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) for TAVR (N = 78) and SAVR (N = 74) cohorts. RESULTS: TAVR patients had smaller pre-procedural annular area (501.7 mm2 vs. 571.8 mm2, p < 0.05) and annular perimeter (80.6 mm vs. 86.5 mm, p < 0.05), but larger mean implanted prosthetic valve size (26.4 mm vs 24.2 mm, p < 0.001) compared to SAVR patients. No differences were observed in predicted EOA, predicted EOA indexed to patient body surface area (EOAi), or predicted PPM grade between TAVR and SAVR groups, including in cohorts sorted by pre-procedural annular size. CONCLUSIONS: For bicuspid AS patients undergoing aortic valve replacement, TAVR achieves similar predicted EOA to SAVR. These data support the use of TAVR in selected patients with bicuspid AS and can inform heart team discussions.

Testing clinical selection criteria for intraoperative transoesophageal echocardiography in isolated coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

Background: There is a lack of evidence associating intraoperative transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) use with improved outcomes among coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery subpopulations. Methods: This matched retrospective cohort study used a US private claims dataset to compare outcomes among different CABG surgery patient populations with vs without TOE. Statistical analyses involved exact matching on pre-selected subgroups (congestive heart failure, single vessel, and multivessel CABG) and used fine and propensity-score balanced techniques to conduct multiple matched comparisons and sensitivity analyses. Results: Of 42 249 patients undergoing isolated CABG surgery, 24 919 (59.0%) received and 17 330 (41.0%) did not receive TOE. After matching, intraoperative TOE was significantly associated with a lower, 30-day mortality: 2.63% vs 3.20% (odds ratio [OR]: 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71-0.92; P=0.002). In the subgroup matched comparisons, intraoperative TOE was significantly associated with a lower, 30-day mortality rate among those with congestive heart failure: 4.20% vs 5.26% (OR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.66-0.94; P=0.007) and among those undergoing multivessel CABG with congestive heart failure: 4.23% vs 5.24% (OR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.65-0.97; P=0.025), but not among those undergoing multivessel CABG without congestive heart failure: 1.83% vs 2.15% (OR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.70-1.02; P=0.089, nor any of the remaining three subgroups. Conclusions: Among US adults undergoing isolated CABG surgery, intraoperative TOE was associated with improved outcomes in patients with congestive heart failure (vs without) and among patients undergoing multivessel (vs single vessel) CABG. These findings support prioritised TOE allocation to these patient populations at centres with limited TOE capabilities.

Impact of transcatheter heart valve type on outcomes of surgical explantation after failed transcatheter aortic valve replacement: the EXPLANT-TAVR international registry.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the impact of transcatheter heart valve (THV) type on the outcomes of surgical explantation after THV failure. AIMS: We sought to determine the outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) explantation for failed balloon-expandable valves (BEV) versus self-expanding valves (SEV). METHODS: From November 2009 to February 2022, 401 patients across 42 centres in the EXPLANT-TAVR registry underwent TAVR explantation during a separate admission from the initial TAVR. Mechanically expandable valves (N=10, 2.5%) were excluded. The outcomes of TAVR explantation were compared for 202 (51.7%) failed BEV and 189 (48.3%) failed SEV. RESULTS: Among 391 patients analysed (mean age: 73.0±9.8 years; 33.8% female), the median time from index TAVR to TAVR explantation was 13.3 months (interquartile range 5.1-34.8), with no differences between groups. Indications for TAVR explantation included endocarditis (36.0% failed SEV vs 55.4% failed BEV; p<0.001), paravalvular leak (21.2% vs 11.9%; p=0.014), structural valve deterioration (30.2% vs 21.8%; p=0.065) and prosthesis-patient mismatch (8.5% vs 10.4%; p=0.61). The SEV group trended fewer urgent/emergency surgeries (52.0% vs 62.3%; p=0.057) and more root replacement (15.3% vs 7.4%; p=0.016). Concomitant cardiac procedures were performed in 57.8% of patients, including coronary artery bypass graft (24.8%), and mitral (38.9%) and tricuspid (14.6%) valve surgery, with no differences between groups. In-hospital, 30-day, and 1-year mortality and stroke rates were similar between groups (allp>0.05), with no differences in cumulative mortality at 3 years (log-rank p=0.95). On multivariable analysis, concomitant mitral surgery was an independent predictor of 1-year mortality after BEV explant (hazard ratio [HR] 2.00, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07-3.72) and SEV explant (HR 2.00, 95% CI: 1.08-3.69). CONCLUSIONS: In the EXPLANT-TAVR global registry, BEV and SEV groups had different indications for surgical explantation, with more root replacements in SEV failure, but no differences in midterm mortality and morbidities. Further refinement of TAVR explantation techniques are important to improving outcomes.

The non to moderately dilated root in acute type A aortic dissection: outcomes of the PENN-BERN registry in young, non-syndromic patients.

OBJECTIVES: There is an ongoing debate regarding whether patients benefit more from root replacement compared to a reconstruction of the sinuses of Valsalva in acute type A aortic dissection (aTAAD). In those with known or suspected connective tissue disorders, root replacement is considered appropriate. However, there are currently no diameter-based guidelines regarding the best approach in patients with minimally to moderately dilated root and no connective tissue disorders. METHODS: From January 2005 to December 2022, a two-centre registry of aTAAD was created. Patients were included based on their age (≤60 years), the absence of root entry and dilatation >50 mm and the absence of syndromic hereditable aortic disease. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on the proximal procedure, root reconstruction and root replacement. Propensity score pair matching was performed based on preoperative characteristics. RESULTS: Cumulative incidence of reintervention at 10 years was slightly higher after root reconstruction 13% vs 3.9% in the matched group (P = 0.040). Survival at 10 years was not affected by the procedure independently of the matching 72.1% vs 71.4% (P = 0.2). Uni- and multivariate Cox regressions showed that a root diameter of >40 mm was associated with a hazard ratio of 7.7 (95% confidence interval 2.6-23) and 5.4 (7-17), respectively, for reoperation for aneurysm and pseudoaneurysm. CONCLUSIONS: Rate of reoperation due to proximal pseudoaneurysm and aneurysm could be significantly reduced with a lower threshold of 40 mm to replace the aortic root in aTAAD than in elective cases.

One-Year Results of a Low-Profile Endograft in Acute, Complicated Type B Aortic Dissection.

BACKGROUND: The safety and effectiveness of the RelayPro endograft (Terumo Aortic) was assessed for the treatment of acute, complicated type B aortic dissection (TBAD). METHODS: A prospective pivotal trial analyzed a primary end point of all-cause mortality at 30 days. Secondary end points included technical success, major adverse events (disabling stroke, renal failure, and paraplegia/paralysis), endoleaks, patency, rupture, device integrity, false lumen perfusion, reinterventions, aortic expansion, and migration evaluated to 5 years. RESULTS: The study involved 22 United States centers and enrolled 56 patients (mean age, 59.5 ± 11.4 years) from 2017 to 2021; of whom, 73.2% were men and 53.6% were African American. TBAD was complicated by malperfusion of the kidneys (51.8%), lower extremities (35.7%), and viscera (33.9%), and rupture (10.7%). Dissection extended proximally to zones 1/2 (14.3%) and zone 3 (78.6%) and distally to the iliac arteries (67.3%). Most procedures were percutaneous (85.5%). Technical success was 100%. Median hospitalization was 7 days (interquartile range, 5-12 days). All-cause mortality at 30 days was 1.8% (1 of 56; upper 95% CI, 8.2%; P < .0001). Seven major adverse events occurred in 6 patients (10.7%), consisting of paraplegia (n = 3), paraparesis (n = 2), disabling stroke (n = 1), and renal failure (n = 1). All paraplegia/paraparesis resolved with lumbar drainage. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated a freedom from major adverse events of 89.1% at each interval from 30 days to 3 years. There was 1 endoleak (Type Ia), 2 retrograde dissections, and aortic diameter growth occurred in 2. There has been no rupture, fistula, component separation, patency loss, stenosis, kinking, twisting, bird beak, loss of device integrity, or fracture. CONCLUSIONS: RelayPro is safe and effective in acute, complicated TBAD. Follow-up is ongoing to evaluate longer-term outcomes and durability.