Sex Related Anatomical Differences in Patients With Aortic Arch Pathology and Their Impact on the Feasibility of Double and Triple Branched Endografts.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate sex based differences in ascending aorta and arch anatomy in patients with underlying proximal aortic disease and to evaluate their impact on feasibility for total endovascular repair with custom made, arch branched devices. METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional review of all patients undergoing open and or total endovascular arch repair due to distal ascending aorta and or aortic arch pathologies in a single high volume aortic centre between 2012 and 2022. Anatomical ascending aorta and aortic arch parameters were analysed on a centreline of flow on a dedicated 3D workstation. Sex related differences of the ascending aorta, aortic arch, and supra-aortic vessels were evaluated. Subsequently, four endovascular devices were assessed for feasibility: double and triple branched devices both for the Zenith (Cook Medical) and Relay (Terumo Aortic) platforms, first in accordance with the instructions for use and then considering the possibility of adjunctive cervical debranching. The primary endpoints were sex specific differences in aortic anatomy, while secondary endpoints included sex based feasibility of branched endograft devices. RESULTS: During the study period, 395 patients underwent total aortic arch repair, of whom 152 (51 female, 33.5%) had high quality available computed tomography angiographies and were included in the study. Female patients had a shorter proximal landing zone than male patients (22 mm vs. 47 mm; p < .001). Left subclavian artery dissection was more frequent in men (24.8% vs. 3.9%; p < .001). Other anatomical parameters showed a similar distribution between sexes. Female patients presented a lower feasibility for double branched devices (35.3% vs. 58.4%; p = .015) as well as a tendency for lower feasibility rates for triple branched devices (31.4% vs. 47.5%; p = .081). CONCLUSION: Although most ascending aortic and arch parameters showed similar trends in both sexes, the availability of a suitable proximal landing zone was lower in female patients. Consequently, female patients had lower feasibility rates for double arch branched endografts and, to lesser extent, for triple arch branched endografts.

A Single-Center Experience With Total Percutaneous Implantation of a Low-Profile Thoracic Aortic Stent-Graft.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of total percutaneous implantation of the Zenith Alpha Thoracic (ZTA) endograft in the treatment of diseases of the descending thoracic aorta. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 56 consecutive patients undergoing total percutaneous ZTA implantation between 2018 and 2020 was performed in a single center. Patients' demographics, clinical characteristics, anatomical parameters, operative details, device features, and postoperative outcomes were assessed. The primary endpoint was ongoing clinical success. A Cox regression model was used to determine the predictive factors of worse postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Eighty-three ZTA endografts were implanted in 35 men and 21 women with a mean age of 69±11 years for the treatment of 26 degenerative aneurysms, 15 type B dissections, and 8 penetrating ulcers, among others. Primary technical success was 100%, with a 30-day ongoing clinical success rate of 94.6%. The 1-year ongoing clinical success rate was 91.1% (51 patients), and freedoms from all-cause mortality, type 1 and 3 endoleaks, and any unplanned reintervention were, respectively, 95.3%, 91.4%, and 88.2% at 1 year. During follow-up, there was one case of surgical conversion for an aorto-esophageal fistula. On the contrary, neither aneurysmal rupture nor significant aneurysmal expansion was recorded. Repair of ruptured thoracic aorta and a high ratio of sheath outer diameter to external iliac artery diameter were found to be independently associated with worse outcomes, with adjusted odds ratios of 4.4 [1.5-15.3] and 4.9 [1.1-23.9], respectively. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of total percutaneous implantation of ZTA endograft show excellent primary technical success and favorable midterm ongoing clinical success. Factors associated with worse outcomes include the repair of ruptured aorta and a high sheath to access vessel ratio.

Transaxillary Branch-to-Branch-to-Branch Carotid Catheterization Technique for Triple-Branch Arch Repair.

PURPOSE: To describe the transaxillary branch-to-branch-to-branch carotid catheterization technique (tranaxillary 3BRA-CCE IT) for cannulation of all supra-aortic vessels using only 1 femoral and 1 axillary access during triple-branch arch repair. TECHNIQUE: After deployment of the triple-branch arch device, catheterization and bridging of the innominate artery (IA) should be performed through a right axillary access (cutdown or percutaneous). Then, the retrograde left subclavian (LSA) branch should be catheterized (if not preloaded) from a percutaneous femoral access, and a 12×90Fr sheath should be advanced to the outside of the endograft. Subsequently, catheterization of the left common carotid artery (LCCA) antegrade branch should be performed, followed by snaring of a wire in the ascending aorta which was inserted through the axillary access, creating a branch-to-branch-to-branch through-and-through guidewire. Over the axillary access, a 12×45Fr sheath should be inserted into the IA branch and looped in the ascending aorta using a push-and-pull technique so that it faces the LCCA branch, allowing for stable catheterization of the LCCA. The retrograde LSA branch should then be bridged following the standard fashion. CONCLUSIONS: This series of 5 patients demonstrates that triple-branch arch repair can be performed with the transaxillary 3BRA-CCE IT, allowing catheterization of the supra-aortic vessels without manipulation of the carotid arteries. CLINICAL IMPACT: The transaxillary 3BRA-CCE IT allows catheterization and bridging of all supra-aortic vessels in triple-branch arch repair through only 2 vascular access points, the femoral artery and the right axillary artery. This technique avoids carotid surgical cutdown and manipulation during these procedures, reducing the risk of access site complications, including bleeding and reintervention, reintubation, cranial nerve lesions, increased operating time, and so on, and has the potential to change the current vascular access standard used during triple-branch arch repair.

[Malperfusion after Aortic Dissection - Management and Techniques]. / Malperfusion nach Aortendissektion - Management und Techniken.

Malperfusion is a common complication of aortic dissection and further increases this deadly disease's mortality. An effective treatment strategy requires a timely diagnosis based on the clinical findings and the available instruments, understanding the disease's pathomechanism, recognising the therapy options recommended by the guidelines, and the diagnostic and therapeutic innovations of the area of research. The final treatment decision should be patient- and case-specific. In this work, we have considered malperfusion after aortic dissection, not only as a complication of aortic dissection but as a separate disease and summarise important information that can contribute to efficient therapy decisions in everyday clinical practice.

Endovascular Repair With Triple Inner-Branch Endograft for Aberrant Subclavian Artery Aneurysm: A Case Report.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular repair of the thoracic aorta (TEVAR) is the preferred option for the treatment of the distal arch and descending thoracic aorta. Fenestrated and branched TEVAR have become an option to treat pathologies of the aortic arch, avoiding sternotomy and cardiopulmonary arrest as well as total surgical debranching. We describe here the case of a symptomatic patient with an arteria lusoria aneurysm associated with Kommerel diverticulum who underwent total endovascular repair with a triple-branched TEVAR. CASE REPORT: A 66-year-old male patient was treated for a symptomatic arteria lusoria artery associated with a Kommerel diverticulum, resulting in difficulty swallowing and choking. We used a custom-made triple inner-branch endograft (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Indiana) following implantation of a right-sided carotid-subclavian (C-S) bypass. The C-S bypass occluded in the interval time between the 2 procedures and required recanalization and stent-graft placement during the aortic arch procedure. The arteria lusoria was embolized with a vascular plug. No complications occurred and postoperative tomography showed exclusion and thrombosis of the Kommerel diverticulum and perfusion of the supra-aortic vessels. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of arteria lusoria aneurysms can be performed with total endovascular arch inner-branch repair, avoiding increased risk of morbidity and mortality caused by open or hybrid procedures.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Outcomes After Operative Treatment of Aberrant Subclavian Artery Pathologies and Suggested Reporting Items.

OBJECTIVE: To synthesise and present all available evidence regarding the surgical treatment of patients with aberrant subclavian artery (aSA) pathologies during the last 30 years. The study also aimed to create a checklist of suggested reporting items to help increase reporting homogeneity. METHODS: A systematic search of medical databases was performed to identify all studies published between 1990 and 2020 reporting on the outcomes of patients undergoing surgery for an aSA pathology. Patients were divided into two groups; Group A included patients undergoing open or hybrid surgery through sternotomy/thoracotomy and Group B included patients undergoing endovascular or hybrid treatment without chest access. The % crude rates (CR) of all variables of interest were calculated. A proportion meta-analysis was performed reporting pooled rates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Three hundred and fourteen studies were identified reporting on the surgical outcomes of 732 patients (60.1% males; 440/732). The quality of evidence was generally low, with 286 studies including fewer than four patients and 28 studies with five or more cases. Aberrant right subclavian artery (aRSA) in a left sided aortic arch was present in 71.4% of the patients and a Kommerell's diverticulum was present in 50.1% of the cases. A total of 68% of the patients were symptomatic on presentation, with the majority complaining of dysphagia (49.6%). Group A included 453 and Group B 279 patients. Studies reporting on five or more patients were included in the main meta-analysis. The pooled early mortality rate was 1.62% (95% CI 0.05% - 4.53%) in Group A and 1.96% (95% CI 0 - 6.34%) in Group B. Pooled rates of symptom relief were 99.52% (95% CI 92.05% - 100.00%) in Group A and 95.79% (95% CI 83.96% - 100.00%) in Group B. CONCLUSION: The surgical techniques used to treat aSA and aortic pathologies involving an aSA had remarkably low mortality rates and high clinical success, regardless of the technique used.

First Experience with the Munich Valsalva Implantation Technique (MuVIT) for Cardiac Output Reduction During Standard and Complex Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair.

OBJECTIVE: The Munich Valsalva Implantation Technique (MuVIT) is a non-invasive alternative which uses a modified Valsalva manoeuvre to reduce cardiac output (CO). The aim of this study was to evaluate the technical success and safety of MuVIT in standard and complex endovascular thoracic aneurysm repair (TEVAR). METHODS: This was a retrospective single centre cohort study. Patients were included who underwent CO reduction with MuVIT between March 2020 and February 2021 for standard and fenestrated/branched TEVAR (fbTEVAR). The target systolic blood pressure (SBP) reduction was used as an indicator of CO reduction. The aim of the SBP reduction was 50% in patients undergoing proximal sealing in Ishimaru zones 0-1 (Group 1), and 30% in patients with sealing in Ishimaru zones 2-3 (Group 2). Efficacy outcomes included MuVIT technical success and procedural technical success. Safety outcomes included MuVIT and procedural related complications in the first 30 days. RESULTS: During the study period 52 cases were screened for MuVIT. Of these, 40 patients (77%) underwent procedures that were performed under MuVIT. Exclusion reasons were local anaesthesia (n = 9); pulmonary contraindications (n = 2), and poor heart pump function (n = 1). Fifteen patients (37.5%) underwent bTEVAR, three patients (7.5%) fTEVAR, and 22 patients (55%) standard TEVAR. Twenty nine (72.5%) procedures were elective, seven (17.5%) were urgent, and four (10%) were as an emergency. Successful proximal endograft deployment under MuVIT was 100%. The target SBP reduction was achieved in 95% (Group 1: 89.5%, Group 2: 100%), with an overall mean reduction of 46% (Group 1: 55%, Group 2: 40%). The 30 day mortality was 7.5%, and was not MuVIT related. Two patients with COPD Gold III/IV developed respiratory complications. CONCLUSION: MuVIT is a safe and effective manoeuvre for CO reduction during aortic arch TEVAR. However, careful patient selection is required and potential adverse effects on patients with severe COPD needs further evaluation.

Clinical Results and Quality of Life after Nonelective Cardiac Surgery in Octogenarians.

BACKGROUND: We analyzed the short-term and mid-term outcomes as well as the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of octogenarians undergoing elective and urgent cardiac surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified 688 consecutive octogenarians who underwent cardiac surgery at our center between January 2012 and December 2019. A propensity score matching was performed which resulted in the formation of 80 matched pairs. The patients were interviewed and the Short Form-36 survey was used to assess the HRQOL of survivors. Multivariable analysis incorporated binary logistic regression using a forward stepwise (conditional) model. RESULTS: The median age of the matched cohort was 82 years (p = 0.937), among whom, 38.8% of patients were female (p = 0.196). The median EuroSCORE II of the matched cohort was 19.4% (10.1-39.1%). The duration of postoperative mechanical ventilation was found to be independently associated with in-hospital mortality (odds ratio: 1.01 [95% confidence interval: 1.0-1.02], p = 0.038). The survival rates at 1, 2, and 5 years was 75.0, 72.0, and 46.0%, respectively. There was no difference in the total survival between the groups (p = 0.080). The physical health summary score was 41 (30-51) for the elective patients and 42 (35-49) for the nonelective octogenarians (p = 0.581). The median mental health summary scores were 56 (48-60) and 58 (52-60), respectively (p = 0.351). CONCLUSION: Cardiac surgery can be performed in octogenarians with good results and survivors enjoy a good quality of life; however, the indication for surgery or especially for escalation of therapy should always be made prudently, reserved, and in consideration of patient expectations.

Emergent Triple-Branched TEVAR and Redistribution of the Branches to the Supra-Aortic Target Vessels for Treatment of a Contained Ruptured Descending Aortic Aneurysm Associated With a Chronic Type A Aortic Dissection.

PURPOSE: To demonstrate the feasibility of urgent endovascular treatment of a chronic type A dissection and contained rupture of the false lumen using a noncustomized triple-branched arch endograft, which necessitated reassignment of the branches to the supra-aortic vessels. CASE REPORT:: A 57-year-old patient with a contained rupture of the descending thoracic aorta, in the setting of a chronic type A dissection and a maximum aortic diameter of 85 mm, was converted to endovascular repair after failure of an open surgical approach. A custom-made triple-branched arch endograft designed for another patient was employed, with concomitant occlusion of the false lumen using a Candy Plug occluder. To adjust the graft's configuration to the patient's anatomy, the supra-aortic vessels were not assigned to the originally planned branches. The 12-month follow-up angiography demonstrated a satisfactory result. CONCLUSION: A noncustomized triple-branched arch endograft can be used in an emergency setting to treat chronic type A dissection, reassigning the branches to the supra-aortic vessels as needed.

Passing a Mechanical Aortic Valve With a Short Tip Dilator to Facilitate Aortic Arch Endovascular Branched Repair.

PURPOSE: To present a novel technique to successfully cross a mechanical aortic valve prosthesis. TECHNIQUE: A 55-year-old female patient with genetically verified Marfan syndrome presented with a 5-cm anastomotic aneurysm of the proximal aortic arch after previous ascending aortic replacement due to a type A aortic dissection in 2007. The patient also underwent mechanical aortic valve replacement in 1991. A 3-stage hybrid repair was planned. The first 2 steps included debranching of the supra-aortic vessels. In the third procedure, a custom-made double branched endovascular stent-graft with a short 35-mm introducer tip was implanted. The mechanical valve was passed with the tip of the dilator on the lateral site of the leaflet, without destructing the valve and with only mild symptoms of aortic insufficiency, as one leaflet continued to work. This allowed the implantation of the stent-graft directly distally of the coronary arteries. Postoperative computed tomography angiography showed no endoleaks and patent coronary and supra-aortic vessels. CONCLUSION: Passing a mechanical aortic valve prosthesis at the proper position is feasible and allows adequate endovascular treatment in complex arch anatomy. However, caution should be taken during positioning of the endovascular graft as the tip may potentially damage the valve prosthesis.

[Ascending Aorta and Aortic Arch - Endovascular Therapy Today and in the Future]. / Aorta ascendens und Arcus aortae ­ endovaskuläre Therapie heute und in der Zukunft.

Pathologies in the region of the aortic arch may occur in isolation, but adjacent segments of the thoracic aorta - the ascending or descending aorta - are much more commonly affected. The first surgical procedures to treat the aortic arch were performed nearly six decades ago. Despite numerous improvements and innovations in the 20th and early 21st centuries, these procedures are still associated with relevant operative mortality and neurological complication rates. Endovascular techniques and modern hybrid procedures are increasingly expanding the therapeutic spectrum in the aortic arch, although the open surgical approach is currently still the gold standard. Endovascular treatment of aortic aneurysm was first performed in the early 1990s in the infrarenal abdominal aorta. It was not long before the first attempts at endovascular therapy were made for the treatment of the aortic arch. In 1996, Inoue et al. reported the use of the first commonly used endoprosthesis to treat aneurysms in the aortic arch. Continuous improvements and refinements in implantation techniques and also implanted material have resulted in endovascular therapy now being an increasingly important option compared to open surgical procedures in the descending thoracic and abdominal aorta and has partially replaced them as the gold standard. This review article aims to provide an overview of the prerequisites, results, but also limitations of endovascular surgery of the aortic arch.

[Aortic Aneurysm: Fenestrated/Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair (EVAR) and Fenestrated/Branched Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR). Is Total Endovascular Repair Already Here?] / Aortenaneurysma: fenestrierte/gebranchte abdominale EVAR (fbEVAR) und fenestrierte/gebranchte thorakale EVAR (fbTEVAR). Ist die komplette endovaskuläre Therapie schon da?

Five years after the first endovascular aortic repair (EVAR), Park et al. reported the first implantation of a fenestrated endoprosthesis. In the meantime, advanced generations of new fenestrated and branched endografts evolved. Endografts for complex pathologies are either so-called "off-the-shelf" grafts with predetermined length, width, diameter and clock position of the branches and fenestrations, predetermined by the manufacturer, "custom-made" grafts which need to be sized and planned individually for patients with specific thoracoabdominal anatomy. Open aortic repair in the treatment of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) still remains challenging and is associated with high morbidity and mortality, even in the elective setting. The ongoing development of endovascular treatment modalities, such as fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F-EVAR, B-EVAR), enables less invasive procedures for more challenging aortic pathologies. In recent years, extensive endovascular treatment of the aortic arch to the thoracoabdominal segment has become more and more important, but its outcomes have not been completely evaluated. The aim of this is article is to provide an overview of the currently available endovascular treatment options for complex aortic aneurysms requiring extensive coverage from the aortic arch to the infrarenal aorta.

Rescue TAVI for Aortic Regurgitation after Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation Following Preoperative Impella® Support.

A patient presented with a decompensated cardiomyopathy requiring invasive hemodynamic support with an Impella® heart pump. Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) became necessary during the further course and the patient was bridged to left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. Postoperatively, the patient did not improve as expected due to new aortic regurgitation (AR) that was most likely caused by the previously placed Impella. A SAPIEN 3 transcatheter aortic valve was implanted as a bail-out strategy; an additional valve-in-valve rescue was required due to paravalvular regurgitation. This resulted in a restitution of valvular function and hemodynamic improvement. TAVI appears to be a valuable bail-out option for postoperative AR following LVAD implantation.

Remote ECLS-Implantation and Transport for Retrieval of Cardiogenic Shock Patients.

OBJECTIVE: Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) emerges as a salvage option in therapy refractory cardiogenic shock but is limited to highly specialized tertiary care centers. Critically ill patients are often too unstable for conventional transport. Mobile ECLS programs for remote implantation and subsequent air or ground-based transport for patient retrieval could solve this dilemma and make full-spectrum advanced cardiac care available to patients in remote hospitals in whom shock otherwise might be fatal. METHODS: From December 2012 to March 2016, 40 patients underwent venoarterial ECLS implantation in remote hospitals with subsequent transport to our center and were retrospectively analyzed. The mobile ECLS team was available 24/7, implantation was performed percutaneously bedside, and compact support systems designed for transport were used. RESULTS: Twenty percent of the patients were female; the mean age was 55 ± 10 years, and the mean Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support score was 1.3 ± 0.5. Patient retrieval was accomplished via ground-based (n = 29, 72.5%, mean distance = 27.9 ± 29.7 km [range, 5.6-107.1 km]) or air (n = 11, mean distance = 62.4 ± 27.2 km [range, 38.9-116.4 km]) transport. No ECLS-related complications occurred during transport. The ECLS system could be explanted in 65.0% (n = 26) of patients, and the 30-day survival rate was 52.5% (n = 21). CONCLUSION: Remote ECLS implantation and interfacility transport on ECLS are feasible and effective. Interdisciplinary teams and full-spectrum cardiac care are essential to achieve optimal outcomes. Rapid-response ECLS networks have the potential to substantially increase the survival of cardiogenic shock patients.

Root Replacement for Graft Infection Using an All-Biologic Xenopericardial Conduit.

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The management of graft infection following ascending aortic replacement (AAR) and/or aortic valve replacement (AVR) with destruction of the root remains a challenge. Besides technical issues, the choice of graft material is controversial. The study aim was to investigate the initial results of aortic root replacement (ARR) as redo-surgery for infection using the xenopericardial all-biologic conduit (BioIntegral) as an alternative to a homograft or prosthetic material. METHODS: Between February 2013 and January 2015, a total of 18 consecutive patients (16 males, two females; mean age 61 ± 14 years) were reoperated on for infection at a mean of 55 ± 61 months (range: 3 to 219 months) following previous AVR (n = 6), supracoronary aortic replacement (SAR, n = 2), AVR + SAR (n = 1), root replacement (n = 7), and root reconstruction (n = 2). Two patients (11%) had undergone more than one previous cardiac operation. Signs of infection were seen on computed tomography (CT) scanning in 17 patients (94%). Additional 18F-FDG PET-CT was performed in nine patients (50%). RESULTS: The cardiopulmonary bypass and crossclamp were 289 ± 77 min and 187 ± 59 min, respectively. Hypothermic circulatory arrest (HCA) + selective antegrade cerebral perfusion (SACP) was necessary in nine patients (50%) and concomitant procedures in 11 (61%). Postcardiotomy extracorporeal life support (ECLS) was necessary in five patients, and renal replacement therapy in eight. One patient died intraoperatively, and the overall 30-day mortality was 22% (n = 4) secondary to multi-organ failure. Risk factors for mortality were myocardial failure requiring ECLS (p = 0.02) and the need for root replacement following previous isolated AVR (p = 0.05). The mean follow up was 12 ± 5 months. Early graft reinfection occurred in one patient (6%), and another presented with pleural empyema without evidence of persisting conduit infection. Thus, freedom from graft reinfection was 94%. No case of structural valve deterioration was seen. CONCLUSIONS: Aortic root replacement using a xenopericardial conduit in patients with graft infection is technically feasible. Hemodynamics and surgical handling are comparable to that of homografts, but the off-the-shelf availability favors this approach. Mortality was substantial but comparable to that of other series and grafts, with low reinfection rates. Long-term outcome regarding the eradication of infection and durability of the graft remains to be demonstrated.

Immediate, Early and Late Failure after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: How to Deal with the Inoperable?

BACKGROUND: Currently, the use of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is constantly increasing, whilst cardiosurgical back-up varies substantially. Besides immediate conversion to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for periprocedural complications, SAVR for TAV failure may be necessary within the early or late post-implant course. The etiology, incidence, risk-stratification, management and outcome for both scenarios are largely unclear. The study aim was to provide details of the authors' experience of SAVR after the failure of TAVI at a single institution. METHODS: Nineteen patients (14 males, five females) underwent SAVR after TAVI at the authors' institution between June 2008 and December 2015. The patients' initial EuroSCORE II was 8.54 ± 9.81. In eight cases (42%; 50% transfemoral) an immediate conversion was necessary due to paravalvular leakage and insufficiency (n = 1), valve-malpositioning (n = 1), valve dislocation (n = 3), valve-trapping in mitral chordae (n = 1), and annular rupture (n = 2). The 50% transfemoral EuroSCORE II was 19.06 ± 8.61. In 11 patients transcatheter valve failure occurred at a mean of 18 ± 17 months after TAVI (two patients with structural valve failure and one with severe paravalvular leakage, seven with prosthetic valve endocarditis, and one patient with aortic aneurysm); the mean EuroSCORE II was 13.42 ± 13.06. RESULTS: For immediate conversion, the cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time and aortic cross-clamp time were 104 ± 40 min and 60 ± 16 min, respectively. Concomitant procedures were necessary in two patients, one patient required hypothermic circulatory arrest (HCA) and one died intraoperatively. For early and late failure, the CPB and cross-clamp times were 115 ± 32 min and 82 ± 20 min, respectively. HCA was necessary in one patient, and concomitant procedures in seven patients. The 30-day survival was 63% for immediate SAVR and 100% for early and late SAVR, even though one more patient died on postoperative day 31 after immediate SAVR. Besides, the longest follow up periods were 29 ± 15 months and 19 ± 14 months for immediate and early/late failure, respectively. In both groups, one patient died from cardiovascular-related causes, and one from non-valve-related causes. CONCLUSIONS: SAVR after previous TAVI will become increasingly relevant. Due to the increasing use of TAVI in medium- or lower-risk patients, adequate strategies must be established since, in comparison to multimorbid patients, not taking action in these patients is not an option. Due to potentially high-risk patients and unique technical implications, SAVR after TAVI differs from conventional (redo) AVR. Under optimal conditions, acceptable survival rates can be achieved, but effective interdisciplinary approaches are essential.

Diagnosis of coronary affection in patients with AADA and treatment of postcardiotomy myocardial failure using extracorporeal life support (ECLS).

BACKGROUND: Myocardial ischemia due to concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD) or coronary dissection in patients with acute aortic dissection type Stanford A (AADA) is associated with myocardial failure and poor outcomes. Preoperative coronary angiography in this group of patients is still debated. The use of CT scan to diagnose coronary affection along with the establishment of high-pitched dual-spiral CT protocols are essential for improving outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed six AADA patients with heart failure who were treated using extracorporeal life support (ECLS). Options for diagnosing coronary affection and different therapeutic strategies for postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock in this patient cohort are discussed. RESULTS: Retrospective review of CT images showed coronary abnormalities in 83% (n=5). Four patients (67%) underwent unplanned coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). ECLS was instituted in 67% (n=4) due to left heart failure and in 33% (n=2) due to right heart failure. Thirty day mortality was 67% (n=4). The two patients that received ECLS for right ventricular support survived and both had undergone CABG. CONCLUSION: Besides preoperative evaluation of the extent of the dissection, focus on coronary affection in CT-scans helps to triage the operative procedure. Hybrid operating rooms allow for immediate interventional and/or surgical treatment and enable for immediate control of revascularization results. The use of ECLS over other types of ventricular support systems may allow for myocardial recovery in selected cases.

Case Report: Incidental finding of an atresia of the inferior vena cava-a challenge for cardiac surgery.

Inferior vena cava atresia is a rare and usually asymptomatic condition. However, when these patients undergo cardiac surgery, it can present an unexpected and challenging situation for the surgeon. Specifically, adequate venous drainage during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) is a critical issue here and may require an extension of cannulation strategies. Adequate preoperative diagnostics, ideally with imaging modalities such as CT angiography or MRI, are required for optimal surgical planning. Here, we describe a rare case of thoracic ascending aortic aneurysm with concomitant inferior vena cava atresia that was successfully operated on. With adequate preoperative planning, we were able to perform an operation without unforeseen complications with standard initialization of CPB.

"Loss of landing zone"-Stabilizing endovascular treatment solutions in the aortic arch after thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

Addressing proximal complications that arise after endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection, such as type Ia endoleaks, "bird-beaking" of the thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) stent, retrograde type A dissection, and postdissection aneurysms, bears considerable complexities. We present a novel and safe method for open arch repair that can ensure a secure and efficient approach for TEVAR complications. The key element of the operative technique is approximating the grafted stent portion to the aortic wall and the arch prosthesis. The technique has successfully been implemented in 11 patients, who received secondary open arch repair from 2019 to 2022 after TEVAR for type B dissection. Our objective is not only to introduce this reliable concept but also to provide a comprehensive demonstration of its advantages and disadvantages compared with currently used open treatment methods and discuss patient outcomes after secondary open arch repair.

Effects of fibrinogen concentrate as first-line therapy during major aortic replacement surgery: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Fibrinogen is suggested to play an important role in managing major bleeding. However, clinical evidence regarding the effect of fibrinogen concentrate (derived from human plasma) on transfusion is limited. The authors assessed whether fibrinogen concentrate can reduce blood transfusion when given as intraoperative, targeted, first-line hemostatic therapy in bleeding patients undergoing aortic replacement surgery. METHODS: In this single-center, prospective, placebo-controlled, double-blind study, patients aged 18 yr or older undergoing elective thoracic or thoracoabdominal aortic replacement surgery involving cardiopulmonary bypass were randomized to fibrinogen concentrate or placebo, administered intraoperatively. Study medication was given if patients had clinically relevant coagulopathic bleeding immediately after removal from cardiopulmonary bypass and completion of surgical hemostasis. Dosing was individualized using the fibrin-based thromboelastometry test. If bleeding continued, a standardized transfusion protocol was followed. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients in the fibrinogen concentrate group and 32 patients in the placebo group were eligible for the efficacy analysis. During the first 24 h after the administration of study medication, patients in the fibrinogen concentrate group received fewer allogeneic blood components than did patients in the placebo group (median, 2 vs. 13 U; P < 0.001; primary endpoint). Total avoidance of transfusion was achieved in 13 (45%) of 29 patients in the fibrinogen concentrate group, whereas 32 (100%) of 32 patients in the placebo group received transfusion (P < 0.001). There was no observed safety concern with using fibrinogen concentrate during aortic surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Hemostatic therapy with fibrinogen concentrate in patients undergoing aortic surgery significantly reduced the transfusion of allogeneic blood products. Larger multicenter studies are necessary to confirm the role of fibrinogen concentrate in the management of perioperative bleeding in patients with life-threatening coagulopathy.