Risk factors for long-term mortality after acute aortic dissection-results of the German registry for acute aortic dissection type a long-term follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: Several short-term analyses from German Registry for Acute Aortic Dissection Type A (GERAADA) have been published. This study investigated whether short-term risk factors are transferable to the long-term prognosis of patients. METHODS: Thirty-three centres with 2686 patients participated in the long-term follow-up. A total of 1164 patients died, 1063 survived and 459 were lost to follow-up during the follow-up timeframe (mean duration: 10.2 years). Long-term mortality of the cohort was compared with an age-stratified, German population. RESULTS: One, 5 and 10 years after initial surgery, the survival of the GERAADA patient cohort was 71.4%, 63.4% and 51%, respectively. Without the early deaths (90-day mortality 25.4%), survival was calculated after 1, 5 and 10 years: 95.6%, 83.5% and 68.3%. Higher age, longer extracorporeal circulation time, shorter perioperative ventilation time and postoperative neurologic deficits were predictive of long-term prognosis. In an age-divided landmark analysis, the mortality of aortic dissection surgery survivors was found to be similar to that of the general German population. If patients are sorted in risk groups according to the GERAADA score, long-term survival differs between the risk groups. CONCLUSIONS: If patients have survived an acute postoperative period of 90 days, life expectancy comparable to that of the general German population can be assumed in lower- and medium-risk patients. Whether the GERAADA score can provide valuable insights into the long-term prognosis of patients undergoing surgery for acute aortic dissection type A is still unclear.

The correlation of age and extension length in DeBakey type I aortic dissection: are older patients over 70 years at a lower risk?

OBJECTIVES: Age-related atherosclerosis has been shown to cause aortic stiffness and wall rigidification. This analysis aimed to correlate age and dissection extension length in a large contemporary multicentre study. We hypothesize that younger patients suffer more extensive DeBakey type I dissection due to aortic wall integrity, allowing unhindered extension within the layers. METHODS: The perioperative data of 3385 patients from the German Registry for Acute Aortic Dissection Type A were retrospectively analyzed with regard to postoperative outcomes and dissection extension. Patients with DeBakey type I aortic dissection (n = 2510) were retrospectively identified and divided into 2 age groups for comparison: ≤69 years (n = 1741) and ≥70 years (n = 769). Patients with DeBakey type II dissection or connective tissue disease were excluded from the analysis. RESULTS: In younger patients (≤69 years), aortic dissection involved the supra-aortic vessels significantly more often (52.0% vs 40.1%; P < 0.001) and extended significantly further downstream the aorta: descending aorta (68.4% vs 57.1%; P < 0.001), abdominal aorta (54.6% vs 42.1%; P < 0.001) and iliac bifurcation (36.6% vs 26.0%; P < 0.001). Consequently, younger patients also presented with significantly higher incidences of preoperative cerebral (P < 0.001), spinal (P < 0.001), visceral (P < 0.001), renal (P = 0.013) and peripheral (P < 0.001) malperfusion. In older patients (≥70 years), dissection extent was significantly more often limited to the level of the aortic arch (40.9% vs 29.2%; P < 0.001). No significant difference was found with regard to 30-day mortality (20.7% vs 23.6%; P = 0.114). CONCLUSIONS: Extensive DeBakey type I aortic dissection is less frequent in older patients ≥70 years than in younger patients. In contrast, younger patients suffer more often from preoperative organ malperfusion and associated complications. Postoperative mortality remains high irrespective of age groups.

Is it Necessary to Stabilize Every Fracture in Patients with Serial Rib Fractures in Blunt Force Trauma?

Introduction: Management of traumatic rib fractures is subject of controversial discussions. Rib fractures are common, especially after traffic accidents and falls. There is no consensus on whether and how many rib fractures need reconstruction. Not every rib fracture needs to be stabilized, but conservative treatment by internal splinting and analgesia is not effective for all patients. Deformities of the chest wall with reduced thoracic volume and restrictive ventilation disorders must be avoided. Intraoperative assessment of fractures and chest stability plays a central role. Material and methods: From 07/2016 to 07/2021, a total of 121 chest wall stabilizations were performed (m:f = 2:1, age 65 ± 14.5 a). Indications for surgery were the following criteria: (1) palpatory instability of the chest wall, (2) dislocated fracture endings, (3) concomitant injuries, (4) uncontrollable pain symptoms. In all patients, a computed tomography scan of the thorax was performed before the osteosynthetic treatment to assess dislocation of the fracture endings and possible concomitant injuries of intrathoracic organs. Results: Video-assisted thoracoscopy was performed in all patients. Hemothorax and concomitant injuries of the lung, diaphragm and mediastinum could be assessed. This was followed by an intraoperative assessment of the rib fractures, in particular penetration of fracture endings and resulting instability and deformity. Relevant fractures could be identified and subsequent incisions for rib osteosynthesis precisely defined. 6.3 (±2.7) rib fractures were detected, but 2.4 (±1.2) ribs treated osteosynthetically. Bilateral rib fractures were present in 26 patients (21.5%). Post-operative bleeding occurred in seven patients (5.8%), a breakage of the osteosynthetic material in two patients (1.7%). Discussion: Intraoperative assessment of relevant fractures and dislocation is the decisive criterium for osteosynthesis. Thoracoscopy is mandatory for this purpose - also to identify accompanying injuries. Not every fracture has to be approached osteosynthetically. Even with serial rib fractures or multiple fractures in a single rib, the thoracic contour can be restored by stabilizing only relevant fractures. Intraoperative palpation can adequately assess the stability and thus the result of the osteosynthesis. Even after surgical treatment of thoracic trauma, adequate analgesia and respiratory therapy are important to the healing process.

Treatment of the aortic root in acute aortic dissection type A: insights from the German Registry for Acute Aortic Dissection Type A.

OBJECTIVES: Surgery of the aortic root in acute aortic dissection type A (AADA) remains a topic of vague evidence since the extend of dissection and surgeons' capability and interpretation of the disease vary remarkably. We aimed to interpret root operation strategies in the German Registry for Acute Aortic Dissection cohort. METHODS: German Registry for Acute Aortic Dissection collected the data of 56 centres between July 2006 and June 2015. A total of 3382 patients undergoing operations for AADA were included and divided into 3 groups according to aortic root procedure types: supracommissural replacement (SCR), conduit replacement (CR) and valve sparing root replacement (VSRR). RESULTS: Patients in SCR (2425, 71.7%) were significantly older than CR (681, 20.1%) and VSRR (276, 8.2%) (63.4 vs 57.5 vs 54.2 years; P < 0.001), more female (38.9% vs 32.0% vs 26.1%; P < 0.001) and presented with less aortic regurgitation (26.3% vs 57.1% vs 56.5%; P < 0.001). VSRR presented with slightly less multiple organ malperfusion (11.6% vs 12.0% vs 10.9%; P = 0.045) and were more often diagnosed for Marfan syndrome (2.4% vs 5.1% vs 9.1%; P < 0.001). Thirty-day mortality was lower for VSRR (11.6%) compared to SCR (16.1%) and CR (19.8%; P = 0.010). Despite longer procedural times, multivariable regression showed no influence of total arch replacement for VSRR on mortality compared to CR (odds ratio 0.264; 95% confidence interval, 0.033-2.117; P = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: SCR remains the procedure of choice in elderly and compromised patients. Extended root preservation techniques may be applied even in combination with extended aortic arch surgery for selected patients for AADA with promising early outcomes.

Treatment of the Aortic Root in Acute Aortic Dissection Type A: Insights from the German Registry for Acute Aortic Dissection Type A (GERAADA) Registry.

OBJECTIVES: Surgery of the aortic root in acute aortic dissection type A (AADA) remains a topic of vague evidence since the extend of dissection and surgeons' capability and interpretation of the disease vary remarkably. We aimed to interpret root operation strategies in the German Registry for Acute Aortic Dissection (GERAADA) cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: GERAADA collected the data of 56 centers between July 2006 and June 2015. A total of 3382 patients undergoing operations for AADA were included and divided into three groups according to aortic root procedure types: supracommissural replacement (SCR), conduit replacement (CR) and valve sparing root replacement (VSRR). RESULTS: Patients in SCR (2425, 71.7%) were significantly older than CR (681, 20.1%) and VSRR (276, 8.2%) (63.4 vs 57.5 vs 54.2 yrs; p < 0.001), more female (38.9 vs 32.0 vs 26.1%; p < 0.001) and presented with less aortic regurgitation (26.3 vs 57.1 vs 56.5%; p < 0.001). VSRR presented with slightly less multiple organ malperfusion (11.6 vs 12.0 vs 10.9%; p = 0.045) and were more often diagnosed for Marfan syndrome (2.4 vs 5.1 vs 9.1%; p < 0.001). Thirty-day mortality was lower for VSRR (11.6%) compared to SCR (16.1%) and CR (19.8%; p = 0.010). Despite longer procedural times multivariable regression showed no influence of total arch replacement for VSRR on mortality compared to CR (OR 0.264; 95% CI, 0.033-2.117; p = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: SCR remains the procedure of choice in elderly and compromised patients. Extended root preservation techniques may be applied even in combination with extended aortic arch surgery for selected patients for AADA with promising early outcomes.