Endovascular Solutions for Aortic Arch Diseases: Total and Hybrid.

Although the endovascular approach is the therapeutic option of choice for thoracic and abdominal aortic diseases, open surgery is still the treatment of choice for aortic arch diseases. While open surgical repair remains the gold standard treatment for complete aortic arch replacement, it continues to be burdened by high mortality and neurologic complications, especially for patients who require redo surgery. Therefore, in the era of endovascular surgery, it is not surprising that hybrid operating rooms, new technologies, and new approaches are strongly challenging open surgery. Less-invasive endovascular procedures, when used to treat aortic arch diseases, when feasible and indicated, have clear advantages over open surgery, primarily because there is no need for cardiopulmonary bypass, hypothermic circulatory arrest, or cerebral protection. Moreover, patients who have already been treated for acute type A aortic dissection continue to have a considerable risk for future aortic reintervention, which is associated with increased risk for short- and long-term mortality. In light of these advantages, it is clear how selected high-risk patients with aortic arch disease could benefit from the endovascular approach. However, the hemodynamic and anatomic characteristics of the aortic arch make the endovascular approach in this region challenging. In fact, uncorrected stent-graft placement can have fatal consequences for the patient and increase the risk of endoleaks and stroke. To minimize these potential risks, precise and accurate preoperative planning to achieve optimal stent-graft dimensions and implantation is essential together with careful patient selection. Endovascular options for the treatment of aortic arch disease include both hybrid procedures and total endovascular solutions. This manuscript provides an overview of the current strategies for endovascular aortic arch treatment, including the most recent available series on this topic. In addition, a literature search offers insight into the current state of the art.

Frozen Elephant Trunk in Aortic Arch Disease: Different Devices for Different Pathologies.

The frozen elephant trunk technique (FET) requires the use of a pre-assembled hybrid prosthesis consisting of a standard Dacron vascular portion to replace the aortic arch and a stent graft component, which is placed into the proximal descending thoracic aorta (DTA) anterogradely in the proximal descending thoracic aorta. In Europe, two hybrid prostheses are available: the E-evita Open Plus hybrid stent graft system provided by JOTEC (Hechingen, Germany) and the ThoraflexTM Hybrid (Vascutek, Inchinnan Scotland). Recommendations for use are extensive pathologies of the arch in case of acute and chronic aortic dissection, degenerative aneurysm and intramural hematoma. The FET approach allows the replacement of the whole arch in one stage with the option of direct treatment of the proximal descending thoracic aorta based on the stent component, creating a safe landing zone for further endovascular treatment more distally. The remarkable feature of this technique is the possibility to perform more proximally (from zone 3 to zone 0) the distal anastomosis in to the arch. This allows for an easier distal anastomosis, reduced hypothermic circulatory arrest time and decreased risk of paraplegia (<5%). Early results are promising and according to the most recent series the rate of developing post-operative renal insufficiency ranges from 3 to 10%, the risk of stroke from 3% to 8% and mortality from 8-15%. The aim of the article will be to provide some knowledge about the use and application of FET procedures in different aortic situations.

Role of Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump and Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Early Graft Failure After Cardiac Transplantation.

Early graft failure (EGF) is a major risk factor for death after heart transplantation (Htx). We investigated the predictive risk factors for moderate-to-severe EGF requiring an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) circulatory support as treatment after Htx. Between January 2000 and December 2014, 412 consecutive adult patients underwent isolated Htx at our institution. Moderate and severe EGF were defined as the need for IABP and ECMO support, respectively, within 24 h after Htx. All available recipient and donor variables were analyzed to assess the risk of EGF occurrence. Overall, moderate-to-severe EGF occurred in 46 (11.1%) patients. Twenty-nine (63.04%) patients required peripheral or central ECMO support in the treatment of severe EGF and 17 (36.9%) patients required IABP support for the treatment of moderate EGF. The predictive risk factors for moderate-to-severe EGF in recipients, as assessed by logistic regression analysis, were a preoperative transpulmonary gradient > 12 mm Hg (odds ratio [OR] 5.2; P = 0.023), a preoperative inotropic score > 10 (OR 8.5; P = 0.0001), and preoperative ECMO support (OR 4.2; P = 0.012). For donors, the predictive risk factor was a donor score ≥ 17 (OR 8.3; P = 0.006). The absence of EGF was correlated with improved long-term survival: 94% at 1 year and 81% at 5 years without EGF versus 76% and 36% at 1 year (P < 0.001), and 70% and 28% at 5 years (P < 0.001) with EGF requiring IABP and ECMO support, respectively. In-hospital weaned and survived patients after IABP or ECMO treatment for moderate-to-severe EGF had a similar 5-year conditional survival rate as transplant patients who had not suffered EGF: 88% without EGF versus 84% with EGF treated with mechanical circulatory support devices (P = 0.08). The occurrence of EGF is a multifactorial deleterious event that depends on donor and recipient profiles. IABP and ECMO support are reliable treatment strategies, depending on the grade of EGF. Furthermore, surviving patients treated with IABP or ECMO have the same long-term conditional survival rate as patients who have not suffered EGF.

Reoperative aortic root surgery: single-center long-term outcomes and literature review.

Background and Objective: Reoperative aortic root surgery has become more and more common over the years and is considered high-risk, with significantly worse outcomes compared to first-procedure root surgery. At our institution, this kind of surgery is frequently performed. The aim of the present review is to describe currently available literature on reoperative surgery on the aortic root in terms of patients' population, indications for surgery and outcomes and to present our center's experience on the matter. Methods: A literature review was performed in order to identify pertinent studies. They were then compared and described. We also described preoperative characteristics, operative strategies and outcomes of all the patients who underwent redo aortic root surgery from January 1986 to December 2022 at our center. Key Content and Findings: Our literature review identified 12 pertinent studies, with a total of 16,627 considered patients. The most frequent indications for redo surgery were endocarditis (35.5%), aneurysm, dissection and pseudoaneurysm. Mean cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and cross-clamp times were 218 and 152 minutes, respectively. In-hospital mortality was 12%. When analyzing our center's data, 344 procedures were identified. Aortic root dilation was the most frequent indication (36.9%). Mean CPB and cross-clamp times were 218.0±78.8 and 158.2±49.7 minutes, respectively. In-hospital mortality was 9.6%. Survival at 5 and 15 years was 76.1% and 51.4% respectively. Freedom from further aortic reintervention was 88.1% after 5 years and 64.9% after 15 years. Conclusions: Reoperative aortic root surgery is a difficult cardiac procedure which is linked to significantly higher mortality than first-time root replacement. If it is performed by experienced surgeons with a careful preoperative planning its result can still be satisfactory. Our results showed acceptable rates of mortality and reinterventions at follow-up. Endocarditis, however, was linked to worse outcomes.

Frozen elephant trunk technique using hybrid grafts: 15-year outcomes from a single-centre experience.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study is to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of the frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique based on 2 different hybrid grafts implanted from January 2007 to July 2022. METHODS: The study includes patients who underwent an elective or emergency FET procedure. Short-term, long-term mortality and freedom from thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) were the primary end points. Analyses were carried out separately for the periods 2007-2012 and 2013-2022. RESULTS: Of the 367 enrolled, 49.3% received E-Vita Open implantation and 50.7% received Thoraflex Hybrid implants. Overall mean age was 61 years [standard deviation (SD) = 11] and 80.7% were male. The average annual volume of FET procedures was 22.7 cases/year. Compared to E-Vita Open, patients implanted with Thoraflex Hybrid grafts were more likely to receive distal anastomosis in zone 2 (68.3% vs 11.6%, P < 0.001) with a shorter stent portion, mean = 103mm (SD = 11.3) vs mean = 149 mm (SD = 12.7; P < 0.001) and they underwent a reduced visceral ischaemia time, mean = 42.5 (SD = 14.2) vs mean= 61.0 (SD = 20.2) min, P < 0.001. In the period 2013-2022, overall survival at 1, 2 and 5 years was 74.8%, 72.5% and 63.2% for Thoraflex and 73.2%, 70.7% and 64.1% for E-Vita, without significant differences between groups (log-rank test = 0.01, P = 0.907). Overall freedom from TEVAR at 1, 2 and 5 years was 66.7%, 57.6% and 39.3% for Thoraflex and 79%, 69.7% and 66% for E-Vita, with significant differences between groups (log-rank test = 5.28, P = 0.029). In a competing risk analysis adjusted for chronic/residual aortic syndromes and stent diameter, the Thoraflex group was more likely to receive TEVAR during follow-up (subdistribution hazard ratio SHR = 2.12, 95% confidence interval 1.06-4.22). CONCLUSIONS: The FET technique addresses acute and chronic arch disease with acceptable morbidity and mortality. Downstream endovascular reinterventions are very common during follow-up.

Is surgical risk of aortic arch aneurysm repair underestimated? A novel perspective based on 30-day versus 1-year mortality.

OBJECTIVES: The decision to undergo aortic aneurysm repair balances the risk of operation with the risk of aortic complications. The surgical risk is typically represented by perioperative mortality, while the aneurysmal risk relates to the 1-year risk of aortic events. We investigate the difference in 30-day and 1-year mortality after total arch replacement for aortic aneurysm. METHODS: This was an international two-centre study of 456 patients who underwent total aortic arch replacement for aneurysm between 2006 and 2020. Our primary end-point of interest was 1-year mortality. Our secondary analysis determined which variables were associated with 1-year mortality. RESULTS: The median age of patients was 65.4 years (interquartile range 55.1-71.1) and 118 (25.9%) were female. Concomitantly, 91 (20.0%) patients had either an aortic root replacement or aortic valve procedure. There was a drop in 1-year (81%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 78-85%) survival probability compared to 30-day (92%, 95% CI 90-95%) survival probability. Risk hazards regression showed the greatest risk of mortality in the first 4 months after discharge. Stroke [hazard ratio (HR) 2.54, 95% CI (1.16-5.58)], renal failure [HR 3.59 (1.78-7.25)], respiratory failure [HR 3.65 (1.79-7.42)] and reoperation for bleeding [HR 2.97 (1.36-6.46)] were associated with 1-year mortality in patients who survived 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: There is an increase in mortality up to 1 year after aortic arch replacement. This increase is prominent in the first 4 months and is associated with postoperative complications, implying the influence of surgical insult. Mortality beyond the short term may be considered in assessing surgical risk in patients who are undergoing total arch replacement.

Aortic tissue pathology in reoperative post-dissection repair following prior use of BioGlue.

AIM: The benefits of BioGlue as a surgical adjunct in aortic procedures have been demonstrated in several studies, but limited information is available regarding the associated histopathological findings of aortic tissue at the time of reoperation. The objective of this study was to assess, at reoperation, the histopathological characteristics of aortic tissue which has had BioGlue applied during a previous surgery. METHODS: This prospective, single-center, single-arm study enrolled patients who were undergoing aortic reoperation and who had BioGlue used during previous aortic surgery. Histopathological assessment of aortic specimens obtained intraoperatively was performed on tissue that would have been removed independent of subject participation in the study. RESULTS: A total of 11 patients were enrolled and based on gross assessment, excessive amounts of BioGlue had been applied during the initial surgery in 36.4% of cases. The samples with the greatest amount of residual BioGlue demonstrated moderate to marked inflammatory responses, while the remaining samples demonstrated minimal to moderate inflammatory responses. Calcification of residual BioGlue was noted in 4 cases. Substantial medial degeneration was associated with suture line dehiscence in 4 cases, some of which had a large quantity of residual BioGlue. No evidence of suture degradation was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Cases with surgical anastomosis dehiscence were associated with substantial medial degeneration. While no histologic findings directly linked BioGlue to these degenerative changes, a contributory role cannot be excluded. Following the manufacturer's instructions for appropriate application of BioGlue is crucial to prevent potential complications.

[Management of acute type B aortic dissection: treatment and follow-up]. / Gestione della dissezione aortica acuta di tipo B: trattamento e follow-up.

Aortic dissection is a life-threatening condition caused by a tear in the tunica intima which creates a false lumen into the aortic wall. Acute type B aortic dissection (TBAD) is defined by the presence of the entry tear in the aorta distal to the left subclavian artery, without ascending aorta and arch involvement, and accounts for 25-40% of all aortic dissections. Optimal medical therapy (OMT), focused on blood pressure and heart rate control, remains the gold standard treatment, especially for patients with uncomplicated TBAD, while complicated dissections require surgical therapy. Recent studies have shown that a considerable number of patients treated only with OMT develop late aorta-related complications that increase morbidity and mortality, as well as the need for surgical intervention. During the last decades, emerging evidence indicates that thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is safe and effective in the treatment of TBAD, both complicated and uncomplicated, with improved long-term survival outcomes and aortic remodeling in combination with OMT compared to OMT alone. However, in cases of acute uncomplicated TBAD the optimal timing for TEVAR is not entirely clarified and there is lack of long-term evidence. Therefore, the role of pre-emptive TEVAR for these patients is still uncertain and the management of acute uncomplicated TBAD remains challenging.

Effect of Preoperative Right Ventricular Dysfunction on Heart Transplantation Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: We investigated if the occurrence of preoperative right ventricular dysfunction is capable of influencing heart transplant results in terms of in-hospital mortality, incidence of primary graft dysfunction, and follow-up mortality. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 517 patients who underwent heart transplant between January 2000 and December 2020. We defined right ventricular dysfunction (RVD), as central venous pressure (CVP) > 15 mm Hg and CVP/pulmonary capillary wedge pressure ratio > 0.63. We identified 2 subgroups in our population: 33 patients with preoperative RVD and 484 patients without RVD. RESULTS: In-hospital mortality was 7.9%. Severe early graft failure occurred in 6.6% of patients, with 26 patients (5.1%) needing intra-aortic balloon pump and 17 patients (3.3%) needing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support. Clinical variables that significantly influenced in-hospital mortality were age, peripheral artery disease, and bilirubin > 1.5 mg/dL, while hemodynamic variables influencing in-hospital mortality were CVP (odds ratio [OR], 1.09 [confidence interval {CI}, 1.03-1.15], P = .004], pulmonary artery systolic pressure (OR, 1.02 [CI, 1.00-1.04], P = .05), CVP/pulmonary capillary wedge pressure ratio (OR, 2.78 [CI, 1.14-6.80], P = .025), pulmonary vascular resistance (OR, 1.15 [CI, 1.01-1.32], P = .042), transpulmonary gradient (TPG) (OR, 1.11 [CI, 1.03-1.18], P = .003) , diastolic transpulmonary gradient (OR, 1.10 [CI, 1.02-1.20], P = .015], together with right ventricular dysfunction (OR, 3.56 [CI, 1.44-8.80], P = .011). On the other hand, clinical variables influencing the incidence of early graft failure were body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) > 30, peripheral artery disease, bilirubin > 1.5 mg/dL, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score excluding international normalized ratio before transplant, and preoperative extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support, while hemodynamic variables were pulmonary arterial systolic pressure (OR, 1.03 [CI, 1.00-1.05], P = .016), TPG (OR, 1.08 [1.01-1.17], P = .03), and right ventricular dysfunction (OR, 3.00 [CI, 1.07-8.40] P = .046). On the multivariable analysis, RVD and TPG were independent predictors of in-hospital mortality, while only TPG was a predictor of early graft failure. Follow-up mortality was 38.7% and was influenced by recipient age, recipient body mass index, and preoperative diabetes. Moreover, 1-, 5-, and 10-year survival of patients with preoperative RVD was significantly worse than patients without RVD (log-rank = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In our population, RVD influenced both in-hospital and long-term results after heart transplant. For these reasons, it appears crucially important to optimize preoperative right ventricular function to improve these patients' outcomes.

Frozen elephant trunk in acute aortic dissection: a literature review.

Background: Acute aortic dissection is a life-threatening condition that requires urgent surgical treatment. The frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique, including the Thoraflex hybrid prosthesis, has emerged as an effective strategy for treating complex aortic pathologies. With the widespread application of the FET technique, it continues to evolve, aiming to simplify procedures and reduce complications. These advancements provide improved outcomes and help save lives in patients with acute aortic dissection. Methods: For this review, PubMed databases were utilized from inception to March 2023. A descriptive approach was employed to identify and present the evidence regarding the application of the FET technique in acute settings and its clinical implications on the postoperative course. Results: In the reviewed studies, FET was a commonly used treatment approach for acute type A aortic dissection. A comprehensive analysis of 12 studies, comprising over 4056 FET procedures, revealed varying rates of early mortality (up to 21.1%), perioperative stroke (ranging from 2.7 to 18.0%), and spinal cord ischemia (ranging from 0 to 8.2%). During the follow-up period, which ranged from 6 to 108 months, the mortality rate was reported to be as high as 38%. Conclusions: The surgical management of acute aortic dissection remains challenging, but FET has shown promising results. Experienced teams have achieved acceptable in-hospital mortality and stroke rates, along with a lower risk of spinal cord injury compared to conventional repair. Furthermore, the FET technique has demonstrated positive alterations in the structure of the distal aorta, potentially improving long-term survival and reducing the necessity for future procedures.

Staging TEVAR after FET - an exception or the rule?

Purpose: Frozen elephant trunk (FET) was born as an ideal one-step procedure to treat complex arch and descending thoracic aorta pathology. It was then proved that it frequently needs reintervention, which can often be performed by thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) extension since FET provides a safe proximal landing zone. We hereby describe our experience in TEVAR extension after FET, its main indications, technique, and outcomes. Methods: Between 2007 and 2022, 371 patients underwent FET at our center. Of these, 119 needed TEVAR extension. Some required more than one TEVAR, with a total of 154 procedures. The preoperative characteristics, indications, and outcomes were analyzed retrospectively. Results: Of 154 TEVAR procedures, 15 were performed in an urgent setting. Mean time from FET to TEVAR was 22,2 ± 28,73 months. Two patients died in the operating room; no others died during the hospital stay. Survival after 1, 2, 5, and 10 years was 96.2%, 93.9%, 90.1%, and 70.5% respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the rates of TEVAR extension for patients in which a Thoraflex™ vs E-vita™ graft was used, nor for zone 2 vs zone 3 anastomosis and stent length. Conclusion: Though TEVAR extension is often required after FET, it is a safe and effective procedure with excellent post-operative outcomes in the short-, mid-, and long-term and allows successful treatment of complex aortic pathologies. Rigorous and specialized follow-up after FET is central to identify the right moment to intervene.

Survival and reoperation in acute aortic syndromes-a single-centre experience of 912 patients.

OBJECTIVES: Acute aortic syndromes are associated with poor outcomes, despite diagnostic and therapeutic advances. We analysed trends in volumes and outcomes from 2000 to 2021. METHODS: The study population includes 494 type A acute aortic syndromes (TAAAS) (54.2%) and 418 type B acute aortic syndromes (TBAAS) (45.8%). Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, long-term survival and freedom from aortic reoperation. RESULTS: Regardless the type of acute aortic syndrome, patient volumes increased over time. Patients with TBAAS were older, more likely to have comorbid conditions and previous cardiac surgery (P < 0.001), while cerebrovascular accidents were more frequent in TAAAS (P < 0.05). Among TAAAS, 143 (28.9%) required total arch and 351 (71.1%) hemiarch replacement. TBAAS management was medical therapy in 182 (43.5%), endovascular in 198 (47.4%) and surgical in 38 (9.1%) cases. Overall in-hospital mortality was 14.6% [18.2% in TAAAS (95% confidence interval (CI) 14.4-21.2%) vs 10.7% in TBAAS (95% CI 7.8%-13.7%); P = 0.0027]. After propensity score adjustment, in-hospital mortality exhibited a significantly decreasing trend from 2000 to 2021 (P < 0.001) in TAAAS and TBAAS. 1-, 5- and 10-year survival was 74.2%, 62.2% and 45.5% in TAAAS and 75.4%, 60.7% and 41.0% in TBAAS (P = 0.975), with no differences among treatment strategies. The adjusted cumulative reoperation risk at 10 years was more than two-fold in TBAAS versus TAAAS (9.5% vs 20.5%, hazard ratio (HR) = 2.30, 95% I 1.31-4.04). CONCLUSIONS: In the last decades, better patient triage and surgical/endovascular techniques led to substantial improvements in the management of acute aortic syndrome, with reduction in early mortality and reoperation rate. However, long-term mortality is still >50%.

Distal stent graft-induced new entry (dSINE) after frozen elephant trunk: a scoping review.

Background: The introduction of hybrid total arch replacement with the frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique has improved the field of aortic surgery by allowing single-stage treatment of complex aortic pathologies. Although FET has been associated with favorable aortic remodeling, it is also associated with the potential development of distal stent graft-induced new entries (dSINEs). The aim of our review is to collect data about the incidence and the supposed conditions for the occurrence of dSINE after total hybrid arch replacement with FET technique. Methods: The literature review was performed using PubMed databases from inception to January 2022. A descriptive approach to detect and display supposed risk factors and predictors for dSINE occurrence has been adopted. Results: Eight studies summarized the state-of-the-art of dSINE in a total number of 544 FET procedures performed to treat acute and chronic aortic dissections. The scoping review showed dSINEs occurrence in 69 patients (12.7%). The mean time between surgery and the diagnosis ranged from 12.6 to 30.6 months. Most patients that developed dSINE received endovascular treatment, whereas a couple of them needed open surgery. According to our experience, from January 2007 to December 2021, in 225 FET procedures a total of 54 cases of dSINE, both with Thoraflex and E-vita grafts have been detected. The mean time between the surgical procedure and the diagnosis was 27.2±33.6 months. Conclusions: dSINEs are frequent complications after FET. Although not emergent, they require proper treatment. Due to dSINE's asymptomatic nature and potential harm, a rigorous follow-up including angio-computed tomography (CT) should be planned.

How much should be covered a type B aortic dissection? Just do it, but don't forget about spinal cord protection.

Revascularization of the left subclavian artery (LSA) is considered a method of spinal cord protection from ischemia during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Coverage of the artery of Adamkiewicz with TEVAR is usually well tolerated because of collateral pathways to this vessel, but on the other side, the LSA is crucial in this regard since it represents the primary source of collateral pathways. In our commentary, we wish to focus the discussion on the LSA revascularization and about the complexity of the anatomy of spinal cord supply in order to underline what have been already studied, analyzed, and recommended from the current guidelines.

Development of aortic arch surgery in Bologna and reflections on current strategy of cerebral protection.

Complications after open arch repair much decreased over time thanks to better methods of organ and cerebral protection. The crossroads was the introduction of antegrade cerebral perfusion as a method of cerebral protection. Other intraoperative techniques also contributed to facilitate arch reconstruction, such as performing circulatory arrest at higher core temperature, using hybrid grafts or endografts, and monitoring cerebral functions during the procedure. As part of this exciting process, we go back in Bologna in the early 1970s to relive some of these fundamental steps on aortic arch surgery. Today a large number of issues on cerebral protection remain for which we have incomplete responses. Probably, a super specialized approach and endovascular techniques will continue to improve the quality of care of patients with different arch pathologies.

BioGlue® is not associated with polypropylene suture breakage after aortic surgery.

Objective: We have encountered broken or damaged polypropylene sutures (Prolene®) at the anastomotic sites during aortic reoperations. Because a surgical sealant, bovine serum albumin-glutaraldehyde (BioGlue®), was used in previous aortic surgery in some of these cases, we undertook this in vitro study to evaluate whether the use of BioGlue® was associated with breakage of polypropylene sutures at the aortic anastomosis. Materials and methods: The broken polypropylene sutures, anastomotic sites and aortic tissue at the location of suture breakage were visually inspected and evaluated intraoperatively. Six human cadaveric aortic samples were incised circumferentially and anastomosed proximally to a valved conduit with running 4-0 polypropylene sutures (Prolene®). In the test group (n = 3), BioGlue® was applied directly to the Prolene® sutures at the anastomotic sites, while in the control group (n = 3) the anastomoses were not sealed with any surgical adhesive. The six samples were immersed in Dulbecco's phosphate buffered saline solution and mounted on a M-6 Six Position Heart Valve Durability Testing System and tested up to 120 million cycles for a 2-year period. During and upon completion of the testing, the integrity of Prolene® sutures, the anastomosis and aortic tissues was regularly assessed by visual inspection. Results: Intraoperative findings included a stretched and thin aortic wall (some with thrombus), a small cleft between the aortic tissue and the Dacron vascular graft. An excessive amount of BioGlue® was often found around the anastomosis, with cracking material, but no signs of mechanical damage were observed in these cases. Upon visual inspection during and after in vitro testing, there was no apparent damage to the polypropylene sutures on the interior or exterior of the aortic anastomoses in any of the samples. No difference was observed in the physical integrity of the polypropylene sutures at anastomotic lines, the anastomoses and aortic tissues between the test and control samples. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that the use of BioGlue® was not associated with breakage of the polypropylene sutures at the anastomotic sites after aortic dissection repair.

Endovascular treatment of penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers of the arch and thoracic aorta: In-hospital and 5-year outcomes.

Objective: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is the treatment of choice for thoracic aorta diseases including penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU). The objective of this study was to analyze the results of TEVAR for the treatment of PAU in our population. Methods: From January 1999 to January 2019, 830 patients with type B aortic syndromes were treated with TEVAR in our institution. Of these we selected 73 patients treated for a PAU. Clinical and radiologic follow-up was performed in all patients. Results: Mean age of our population was 72 ± 8 years. Fifteen patients (20.5%) were treated in an emergency setting. The proximal landing zone was in arch zone 2 in 22 patients (30.1%). In-hospital mortality was 6.8% and was associated with acute presentation (P = .005). Distal arch delivery of the endograft was unrelated to mortality (Fisher exact test, P = .157). Survival at 1 and 5 years was 81.7% and 67.3%, respectively. Sixteen patients underwent reintervention of the thoracic aorta. Patients who underwent emergency surgery and older patients had a shorter survival (log rank test, P < .001). No difference in survival was shown according to the proximal landing zone (log rank P = .292) or the dimension of the thoracic aorta (log rank P = .067). In multivariable Cox regression analysis, only age older than 75 years was associated with 5-year mortality (hazard ratio, 6.60; 95% CI, 2.12-20.56); P < .001). Conclusions: The use of TEVAR for treatment of aortic PAU is a safe procedure in an elective setting despite necessity of arch stent grafting. An early intervention performed at smaller aortic diameters of <55 mm might be beneficial in selected patients to improve late survival.

"Why is frozen elephant trunk better than classical elephant trunk?"

The treatment of complex aortic arch disease, in chronic or acute setting, has always represented a fascinating challenge for the heart surgeon also because, often, the involvement of the aortic arch is associated with a simultaneous involvement of the ascending aorta and of the proximal portion of the descending thoracic aorta. In recent years, there have been many surgical and/or endovascular techniques and approaches in a single step or multiple steps proposed with the aim of treating and simplifying these complex conditions. The first procedure available for this purpose was the conventional elephant trunk technique, proposed by the German surgeon Hans Borst, back in 1983. In the following years, the technique has undergone modifications, up to what is nowadays considered its most modern evolution, represented by the frozen elephant trunk which allows managing the proximal descending thoracic aorta using the antegrade release of a self-expandable stent graft. In this review article, we try to analyze the advantages and drawbacks of both techniques from clinical and practical points of view.

Reoperations on the ascending aorta and aortic arch: A retrospective series of 453 patients.

OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to analyze the outcomes of reoperative thoracic aortic surgery at our institution from January 1986 to December 2018 to identify specific risk factors for early and late mortality. METHODS: Two groups of patients were identified: aortic root or ascending aorta repair (group 1: proximal repair, 218 patients, 48%) and arch surgery or descending thoracic aorta repair (group 2: distal repair, 235 patients, 52%). Primary end points were 30-day mortality, 10-year survival, and freedom from aortic reoperations. RESULTS: The 30-day mortality (6.4% vs 8.1%) and in-hospital mortality (8.3% vs 11.9%) were similar (P > .05) in the 2 groups. Multivariable analysis identified female gender (odds ratio, 8.60, P < .01), endocarditis (odds ratio, 2.96, P = .04), and cardiopulmonary bypass time (odds ratio, 1.02, P < .01) as risk factors for 30-day mortality. Mean follow-up time was 163 months (confidence interval, 147-179). Long-term survival at 1, 5, and 10 years was 91.2%, 79.4%, and 66.3% in the proximal repair group and 80.7%, 68.8%, the and 55.3% in distal repair group, respectively (P = .03). According to the indication, 1-, 5-, and 10-year survivals were 92.1%, 82.3%, and 68.8% in degenerative aneurysms; 82.7%, 72.4%, and 56.3% in residual dissections; 80.9%, 65.4%, and 50.3% in endocarditis and pseudoaneurysms; 69.2%, 52.7%, and 42.2% in acute type A aortic dissections, respectively (P < .01). Competing risk analysis showed a significantly different cumulative incidence of reoperation at 1, 5, and 10 years between the 2 groups: 0.50%, 0.50%, and 0.90%, respectively, for the proximal repair group, and 0.40%, 4.30%, and 7.70%, respectively, the for distal repair group (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, short- and long-term results of reoperative thoracic aortic surgery were satisfactory in chronic aneurysms but poor in aortic dissections, pseudoaneurysms, and active endocarditis. Reoperative aortic surgery carries a high risk, regardless of the anatomic extension of the procedure.

Similar outcome of tricuspid valve repair and replacement for isolated tricuspid infective endocarditis.

AIMS: To compare early and late mortality of acute isolated tricuspid valve infective endocarditis (TVIE) treated with valve repair or replacement. METHODS: Patients who were surgically treated for TVIE from 1983 to 2018 were retrieved from the Italian Registry for Surgical Treatment of Valve and Prosthesis Infective Endocarditis. All the patients were followed up by means of phone interview or calling patient referral physicians or cardiologists. Kaplan-Meier method was used to assess late survival and survival free from TVIE recurrence with log-rank test for univariate comparison. The primary end points were early mortality (30 days after surgery) and long-term survival free from TVIE recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 4084 patients were included in the registry. Among them, 149 patients were included in the study. Overall, 77 (51.7%) underwent TV repair and 72 (48.3%) TV replacement. Early mortality was 9% (13 patients). Expected early mortality according to EndoSCORE was 12%. The TV repair showed lower mortality and major complication rate (7% and 16%), compared with TV replacement (11% and 25%), but statistical significance was not reached. Median follow-up was 19.1 years (14.3-23.8). Late deaths were 30 and IE recurrences were 5. No difference in cardiac survival free from IE was found between the two groups after 20 years (80 ±â€Š6% Repair Group vs 59 ±â€Š13% Replacement Group, P = 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: Overall results indicate that once surgically addressed, TVIE has a low recurrence rate and excellent survival, apparently regardless of the type of surgery used to treat it.