Renal Dysfunction at Discharge and Long-Term Survival in Acute Type A Aortic Dissection.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to investigate the association between renal dysfunction at discharge and long-term survival in acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) patients following surgery. METHODS: From 2000 to 2021, 784 patients underwent aortic repair for an ATAAD. Patients were stratified based on creatinine (Cr) level at discharge alive or dead: normal Cr (n = 582) and elevated Cr defined as >1.3 mg/dL for males and >1.0 mg/dL for females or on dialysis at discharge (n = 202). RESULTS: Preoperatively, both groups had similar rates of comorbidities except for the elevated-Cr group which had more diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and chronic and acute renal insufficiency. Both groups had similar open ATAAD repair procedures. Postoperative outcomes in the elevated-Cr group were significantly worse, including six times higher operative mortality (20% versus 3.4%, P < 0.0001). The landmark long-term survival after discharge alive was significantly worse in the elevated-Cr group than the normal-Cr group (10-y survival: 48% versus 69%, P = 0.0009). The elevated Cr on dialysis at discharge group had significantly worse five-year survival (40%) than the elevated Cr not on dialysis at discharge group (80%, P = 0.02) and the normal-Cr group (87%, P < 0.0001). Additionally, the elevated Cr not on dialysis had a worse five-year survival than the normal-Cr group (80% versus 87%, P = 0.02). Elevated Cr at discharge on dialysis was a significant risk factor for late mortality (hazard ratio = 4.22, 95% confidence interval: [2.07, 8.61], P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Renal dysfunction at discharge was associated with significantly decreased short-term and long-term survival following open ATAAD repair. Surgeons should aggressively prevent renal dysfunction, especially new-onset dialysis, at discharge as it is correlated with significantly worse short-term and long-term outcomes.

Progression of aortic root based on long-term imaging studies after acute type A dissection repair.

BACKGROUND: To determine the progression of aortic root in acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) patients after aortic root repair (ARr) or replacement (ARR) based on long-term follow-up imaging studies. METHODS: From 1996 to 2019, 732 patients had ATAAD repair at our institution. Six hundred and seven of these patients had either ARr, (n = 383) or ARR (n = 224). Eighty-one patients were excluded due to a lack of postoperative imaging. Three hundred and thirty-two patients were included in the repair group and 194 patients in the replacement group for long-term follow-up imaging study. RESULTS: Compared to the ARR group, the ARr group was significantly older (60 years vs. 55 years) and had more patients with hypertension (79% vs. 63%) but less male patients (63% vs. 79%) and connective tissue disorder (1.8% vs 8%). The ARr group had more zone two arch replacement (22% vs. 11%), similar HCA time (35 min vs. 31 min), shorter cardiopulmonary bypass time (203 min vs. 266 min), aortic cross-clamp time (128 min vs. 214 min), and fewer concomitant coronary artery bypass (3.9% vs. 8.9%). The root growth rate over 12 years was similar between the repair and replacement group (0.20 mm/year vs. 0.18 mm/year, p = .75). Both the repair and replacement group had similar 15-year cumulative incidence of reoperation (6.9% vs. 5.9%; p = .67), operative mortality (7.8% vs. 8.5%; p = .78), and 15-year survival (51% vs. 52%; p = .40). CONCLUSIONS: There was minimal growth of the aortic root after root repair or replacement for ATAAD patients. Both aortic root repair and replacement were acceptable techniques for ATAAD surgery in select patients.

Outcomes of Bicuspid Aortic Valve Thoracic Aorta (4.0-4.5 cm) After Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: There is little evidence on managing the proximal aorta of 4.0-4.5 cm during aortic valve replacement (AVR) in bicuspid aortic valve patients. METHODS: A total of 431 patients between 1993 and 2019 underwent either an isolated AVR, AVR + concomitant ascending aorta replacement, or aortic root replacement. We divided patients into native root dilation (4.0-4.5 cm, n = 121) vs root control groups (<4.0 cm, n = 238), native ascending dilation (4.0-4.5 cm, n = 50) vs ascending control groups (<4.0 cm, n = 166), or proximal dilation (root or ascending aorta 4.0-4.5 cm, n = 160) and proximal control groups (both root and ascending aorta <4.0 cm, n = 272). RESULTS: Growth rate was similar between the root dilation and control groups, (both were 0.1 mm/y, P = .56). The ascending dilation group had an aorta growth rate of 0.0 mm/y after AVR or root replacement, which was significantly different from the ascending control group (0.2 mm/y), P = .01. Furthermore, growth rate was similar between the proximal dilation (combined root or ascending dilation) and control group (both were 0.1 mm/y, P = .20). There were only 2 ascending aortic aneurysm repairs after AVR in the whole cohort. The long-term survival was similar between the root or ascending dilation groups vs root or ascending control groups, and between the proximal dilation and control groups. Multivariable Cox regression confirmed aortic root or ascending dilation was not a significant risk factor of long-term mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings supported not replacing a 4.0-4.5 cm proximal thoracic aorta, including aortic root and ascending aorta, at the time of AVR for bicuspid aortic valve patients.

Outcomes in Patients With Chronic Renal Failure on Hemodialysis After Aortic Valve or Root Replacement.

The long-term survival and reoperation rate in chronic renal failure (CRF) on hemodialysis (HD) patients after aortic valve/root replacement (AVR/ARR) with a stentless bioprosthesis is unknown. From 1992-2015, 1941 patients underwent AVR/ARR with stentless valve for primary indications of aortic stenosis/insufficiency, root aneurysm, and acute type A aortic dissection, including 93 CRF-HD (64 new-onset postoperative HD, and 29 preoperative HD) and 1848 non-CRF-HD. Data was obtained from the STS database, retrospective chart review, administered surveys and national death index data. Compared to the non-CRF-HD group, the CRF-HD group had significantly higher incidence of diabetes mellitus (28 vs 18%), CAD (49 vs 38%), COPD (31 vs 16%), NYHA class IV (12 vs 4%), atrial fibrillation (24 vs 12%), and previous cardiac surgery (27 vs 16%). Postoperatively, CRF-HD group had a higher reoperation for bleeding (10 vs 4%), length of hospital stays (20 vs 7 days), and operative mortality (23 vs 2.3%), all p < 0.01. The odds ratio of CRF-HD for operative mortality was 8.97. The long-term survival was worse in CRF-HD group than that in non-CRF-HD group [8-year survival: 31% vs 70%, p < 0.0001]. The hazard ratio of CRF-HD for long-term mortality was 2.4. The 10-year cumulative reoperation rate for structural valve deterioration in the CRF-HD group was 6.0% vs 5.0% in the non-CRF-HD group, p = 0.74. Surgeons should consider poor short- and long-term outcomes of patients with high risk of being on dialysis when offering aortic valve/root replacement. Bioprosthesis could be a good option in this patient population.

The Impact of Nonpharmacological Interventions on Patient Experience, Opioid Use, and Health Care Utilization in Adult Cardiac Surgery Patients: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Despite pharmacological treatments, patients undergoing cardiac surgery experience severe anxiety and pain, which adversely affect outcomes. Previous work examining pediatric and nonsurgical adult patients has documented the effectiveness of inexpensive, nonpharmacological techniques to reduce anxiety and pain as well as health care costs and length of hospitalization. However, the impact of nonpharmacological interventions administered by a dedicated comfort coach has not been evaluated in an adult surgical setting. OBJECTIVE: This trial aims to assess whether nonpharmacological interventions administered by a trained comfort coach affect patient experience, opioid use, and health care utilization compared with usual care in adult cardiac surgery patients. This study has 3 specific aims: assess the effect of a comfort coach on patient experience, measure differences in inpatient and outpatient opioid use and postoperative health care utilization, and qualitatively evaluate the comfort coach intervention. METHODS: To address these aims, we will perform a prospective, randomized controlled trial of 154 adult cardiac surgery patients at Michigan Medicine. Opioid-naive patients undergoing first-time, elective cardiac surgery via sternotomy will be randomized to undergo targeted interventions from a comfort coach (intervention) versus usual care (control). The individualized comfort coach interventions will be administered at 6 points: preoperative outpatient clinic, preoperative care unit on the day of surgery, extubation, chest tube removal, hospital discharge, and 30-day clinic follow-up. To address aim 1, we will examine the effect of a comfort coach on perioperative anxiety, self-reported pain, functional status, and patient satisfaction through validated surveys administered at preoperative outpatient clinic, discharge, 30-day follow-up, and 90-day follow-up. For aim 2, we will record inpatient opioid use and collect postdischarge opioid use and pain-related outcomes through an 11-item questionnaire administered at the 30-day follow-up. Hospital length of stay, readmission, number of days in an extended care facility, emergency room, urgent care, and an unplanned doctor's office visit will be recorded as the primary composite endpoint defined as total days spent at home within the first 30 days after surgery. For aim 3, we will perform semistructured interviews with patients in the intervention arm to understand the comfort coach intervention through a thematic analysis. RESULTS: This trial, funded by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Foundation in 2019, is presently enrolling patients with anticipated manuscript submissions from our primary aims targeted for the end of 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Data generated from this mixed methods study will highlight effective nonpharmacological techniques and support a multidisciplinary approach to perioperative care during the adult cardiac surgery patient experience. This study's findings may serve as the foundation for a subsequent multicenter trial and broader dissemination of these techniques to other types of surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04051021; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04051021. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/21350.