Comparison of open thoracoabdominal repair for chronic aortic dissections and aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: Aortic dissection is common in patients undergoing open surgical repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). Most often, dissection is chronic and is associated with progressive aortic dilatation. Because contemporary outcomes in chronic dissection are not clearly understood, we compared patient characteristics and outcomes after open TAAA repair between patients with chronic dissection and those with non-dissection aneurysm. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from 3470 open TAAA repairs performed in a single practice. Operations were for non-dissection aneurysm in 2351 (67.8%) and chronic dissection in 1119 (32.2%). Outcomes included operative mortality and adverse events, a composite variable comprising operative death and persistent (present at discharge) stroke, paraplegia, paraparesis, and renal failure necessitating dialysis. Logistic regression identified predictors of operative mortality and adverse events. Time-to-event analyses examined survival, death, repair failure, subsequent progressive repair, and survival free of failure or subsequent repair. RESULTS: Compared with patients with non-dissection aneurysm, those with chronic dissection were younger, had fewer atherosclerotic risk factors, and were more likely to have heritable thoracic aortic disease and undergo extent II repair. The operative mortality rate was 8.5% (n = 296) overall and was higher in non-dissection aneurysm patients (n = 217; 9.2%) than in chronic dissection patients (n = 79; 7.1%; P = .03). Adverse events were less frequent (P = .01) in patients with chronic dissection (n = 145; 13.0%), 22 (2.0%) of whom had persistent paraplegia. Chronic dissection was not predictive of operative mortality (P = .5) or adverse events (P = .6). Operative mortality and adverse events, respectively, were independently predicted by emergency repair (odds ratio [OR], 3.46 and 2.87), chronic kidney disease (OR, 1.74 and 1.81), extent II TAAA repair (OR, 1.44 and 1.73), increasing age (OR, 1.04/year and 1.04/year), and increasing aortic cross-clamp time (OR, 1.02/minutes and 1.02/minutes). Patients with chronic dissection had lower 10-year unadjusted mortality (42% vs 69%) but more frequent repair failure (5% vs 3%) and subsequent repair for progressive aortic disease (11% vs 5%) than patients with non-dissection aneurysm (P < .001); these differences were no longer statistically significant after adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes of open TAAA repair vary by aortic disease type. Emergency repairs and atherosclerotic diseases most commonly occur in patients with non-dissection aneurysm and independently predict operative mortality. Repair of chronic dissection is associated with low rates of adverse events, including operative mortality and persistent paraplegia, along with reasonable late survival and good durability. However, patients with chronic dissection tend to more commonly undergo subsequent repair to treat progressive aortic disease, which emphasizes the need for robust long-term imaging surveillance protocols.

Outcomes After Extent I Thoracoabdominal Aortic Repair: Focus on Heritable Aortic Disease.

BACKGROUND: Crawford extent I thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repairs are increasingly performed by an endovascular approach, including in patients with heritable thoracic aortic disease (HTAD). We evaluated outcomes after open extent I TAAA repair in patients with and without HTAD. METHODS: This retrospective study included 992 patients (median age, 67 years; quartile 1-quartile 3, 57-73 years) who underwent extent I TAAA (1990-2022), stratified by the presence of HTAD (n = 177 [17.8%]). Patients with HTAD had genetic aortopathies or presented at age ≤50 years, and 35% (62 of 177) had Marfan syndrome. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of operative death and adverse event, a composite of operative death and persistent (present at discharge) stroke, paraplegia, paraparesis, and renal failure necessitating dialysis. Long-term outcomes were analyzed with competing risks analysis. RESULTS: Patients with HTAD had lower rates of operative mortality (1.7% vs 7.0%, P = .01) and composite adverse event (2.8% vs 12.3%, P < .001) than non-HTAD patients. Most HTAD patients were discharged home (92.6% vs 76.9%, P < .001). Predictors of operative death were increasing age, aortic dissection, tobacco use, chronic symptoms, and rupture. Predictors for adverse event were increasing age, acute symptoms, chronic dissection, and rupture. Patients with HTAD had substantially better repair-failure-free survival (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Open extent I TAAA repair was effective in patients with HTAD, with low operative mortality and adverse event rates, better late survival, and excellent long-term durability, making a compelling argument for preferring open repair in these patients.

Outcomes of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair in patients with a previous myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVE: Many patients undergoing thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair have had a previous myocardial infarction (MI). To address the paucity of data regarding outcomes in such patients, we aimed to compare outcomes after open TAAA repair in patients with and without previous MI. METHODS: From 1986 to 2022, we performed 3737 consecutive open TAAA repairs. Of these, 706 (18.9%) were in patients with previous MI. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify predictors of operative death. Propensity score matching analyzed preoperative and select operative variables to create matched groups of patients with or without a previous MI (n = 704 pairs). Late survival was determined by Kaplan-Meier analysis and compared by log rank test. RESULTS: Overall, operative mortality was 8.5% and the adverse event rate was 15.2%; these were elevated in patients with MI (11.0% vs 7.9% [P = .01] and 18.0% vs 14.6% [P = .02], respectively). In the propensity score-matching cohort, the MI group had a greater rate of cardiac complications (32.4% vs 25.4%; P = .005) and delayed paraparesis (5.1% vs 2.4%; P = .1); however, there was no difference in operative mortality (11.1% vs 10.9%; P = 1) or adverse event rate (18.0% vs 16.8%; P = .6). Overall, previous MI was not independently associated with operative mortality in multivariable analysis (P = .1). The matched MI group trended toward poorer 10-year survival (29.8% ± 1.9% non-MI vs 25.0% ± 1.8% MI; P = .051). CONCLUSIONS: Although previous MI was not associated with early mortality after TAAA repair, patients with a previous MI had greater rates of cardiac complications and delayed paraparesis. Patients with a previous MI also trended toward poorer survival.

The severity of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is associated with adverse outcomes after open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed associations between outcomes after open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair and preoperative airflow limitation stratified by the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) spirometric classification of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) severity. METHODS: Among 2368 open elective TAAA repairs in patients with spirometric data, 1735 patients had COPD and 633 did not. Those with COPD were stratified by preoperative respiratory dysfunction as GOLD 1 (forced expiratory volume in the first second of expiration [FEV1] ≥80% of predicted; n = 228), GOLD 2 (50% ≤ FEV1 < 80% of predicted; n = 1215), GOLD 3 (30% ≤ FEV1 < 50% of predicted; n = 260), or GOLD 4 (FEV1 < 30% of predicted; n = 32). Early outcomes included operative mortality and adverse events (operative death or persistent stroke, spinal cord deficit, or renal failure requiring dialysis); associations of outcomes were determined using logistic regression models. Kaplan-Meier analysis compared late survival by the log-rank test. RESULTS: Pulmonary complications occurred in 38.4% of patients with COPD versus 30.0% without COPD (P < .001). Operative mortality and adverse events were more frequent in patients with COPD than without COPD (7.9% vs 3.8% [P < .001] and 14.9% vs 9.8% [P = .001], respectively). Worsening GOLD severity was independently associated with operative death and adverse event. Survival was poorer in patients with COPD than in those without (61.9% ± 1.2% vs 73.6% ± 1.8% at 5 years; P < .001), particularly in patients with increasing GOLD severity (68.7% ± 3.2% vs 63.7% ± 1.4% vs 51.4% ± 3.2% vs 31.3% ± 8.2% at 5 years; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with COPD are at elevated risk for operative death and adverse events. Staging by GOLD severity aids preoperative risk stratification. Patients with airflow limitations may benefit from optimization before TAAA repair.

Outcomes of aortic root replacement in patients with Marfan syndrome: the role of valve-sparing and valve-replacing approaches.

Background: Marfan syndrome (MFS) is a heritable thoracic aortic disease with pervasive cardiovascular effects, including commonly, a dilated aortic root. Traditionally, the root is replaced using a mechanical composite valve graft (CVG); however, this valve-replacing (VR) approach necessitates a lifelong regimen of anticoagulation with a potential for late bleeding complications. In time, valve-sparing (VS) approaches were developed. Today, several options for aortic root replacement (ARR) exist; each has advantages and disadvantages that helps inform choice. The Aortic Valve Operative Outcomes in Marfan Patients (AVOMP) is a multi-center international registry to analyze clinical outcomes of ARR in MFS patients using either VR or VS techniques to better elucidate choice. We summarize outcomes of AVOMP and present our own experience. Methods: We performed 223 consecutive elective ARR [1991-2023] in patients with MFS; 15 such repairs were included in AVOMP. Repairs included 113 (51%) using a mechanical CVG, 62 (28%) using a VS approach, and 48 (22%) using a bioprosthetic root. Many patients underwent aortic arch repair (30% to 54% by type). Results: The median patient age was 38 [29-52] years. In comparing VS and VR groups, patients were similar in age and rates of major comorbidities and symptoms. Patients with VR repair had a more complex aortic history. The rate of redo sternotomy was 24% (n=54). Operative death was uncommon [4% overall (10/223); ranging from 2% to 8% by type], and stroke was rare [1/223 (<1%)]. Late survival and reoperation differed by operative approach; survival was improved in patients who underwent VS repair. Conclusions: We found that repair in patients with MFS undergoing ARR resulted in low operative risk. Our late results were similar to those of AVOMP in that patients undergoing VS repair tended to experience greater rates of valvular-structural deterioration, although this did not appear to impact survival.

Independent associations with early mortality after open repair of Crawford extent IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify outcomes and factors that independently associate with early mortality after open repair of Crawford extent IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms, defined as aneurysms confined to the segment below the diaphragm. METHODS: This retrospective analysis included 721 extent IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repairs performed in our institution from 1986 to 2021. Indications for repair were aneurysm without dissection in 627 cases (87.0%) and aortic dissection in 94 cases (13.0%). Overall, 466 patients (64.6%) were symptomatic preoperatively; 124 (17.2%) procedures were performed in patients with acute presentation, including 58 (8.0%) ruptured aneurysms. RESULTS: Operative death occurred after 49 (6.8%) repairs. Persistent renal failure necessitating dialysis occurred after 43 (6.0%) repairs. Binary logistic regression modeling revealed that previous extent II thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair, chronic kidney disease, previous myocardial infarction, urgent or emergency repair, and longer crossclamp times during surgery were independently associated with operative mortality. Among early survivors (n = 672), competing risk analysis revealed that cumulative incidence of mortality and reintervention rates at 10 years were 74.8% (95% confidence interval, 71.4%-78.5%) and 3.3% (95% confidence interval, 2.2%-5.1%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although patient comorbidities contributed to operative mortality, factors associated with the repair, such as urgent or emergency status, the duration of aortic crossclamping, and certain types of complex reoperation, also played prominent roles. Patients who survive the operation can expect a durable repair that usually is free from late reintervention. Expanding our collective knowledge regarding patients who undergo open repair of extent IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms will enable clinicians to establish best practices and improve patient outcomes.

Contemporary Midterm Outcomes After Primary Repair of Chronic Type A Aortic Dissection.

BACKGROUND: Without surgical repair, acute type A aortic dissection (TAAD) is usually fatal. However, some patients survive without an early operation and progress to the chronic phase. Contemporary outcomes of primary surgical repair of chronic TAAD are unclear, so we evaluated them at our single-practice service. METHODS: During 1990 to 2021, 205 patients underwent repair of TAAD in the chronic phase (>60 days after onset). The 2 relevant DeBakey classifications were nearly equally represented: type I, 52% (n = 107), and type II, 48% (n = 98). The median interval between dissection onset and repair was 7 months (interquartile range, 3-25 months). Kaplan-Meier and competing-risk analyses provided time-dependent outcomes. RESULTS: At the time of intervention, most patients (40%) had chronic symptoms. Type I patients were younger than type II patients; however, comorbidities were similar. Most patients (n = 183 [87%]) underwent hemiarch or total arch repair, although total arch replacement was more common in type I dissection (P < .001). There were 15 operative deaths (7%), and 7 strokes (3%) persisted to the time of death or discharge. No patient had persistent paraplegia. Median follow-up was 5 years (interquartile range, 2-11 years). The 5-year reoperation-free survival was 61% (95% CI, 54%-68%), and the incidence of reoperation was 3% (95% CI, 0.4%-5%). Patients with type I and type II dissection did not differ significantly in survival (P = .2). CONCLUSIONS: Durable repair can be achieved with reasonable operative risk. Treatment is individualized and is associated with low rates of persistent neurologic complications. Despite differing operative approaches by DeBakey type, early and late outcomes were similar.

The intersection of community socioeconomic factors with gender on outcomes after thoracic aortic surgery.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the relationship among community socioeconomic factors (poverty, income, and education), gender, and outcomes in patients who underwent ascending aortic, root, and arch surgery. METHODS: For 2634 consecutive patients, we associated patients' ZIP codes with community socioeconomic factors. The composite adverse outcome comprised death, persistent neurological injury, and renal failure necessitating dialysis at discharge. Multivariable analysis and Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used. Men and women from the full cohort and from the elective patients were propensity matched. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 3.6 years (interquartile range, 1.2-9.3). Men lived in areas characterized by less poverty (P = .03), higher household income (P = .01), and more education (P = .02) than women; likewise, in the elective cohort, all community socioeconomic factors favored men (P ≤ .009). Female gender predicted composite adverse outcome (P = .006). In the propensity-matched women and men (820 pairs), the composite adverse outcome rates were 14.2% and 11%, respectively (P = .06). In 583 propensity-matched pairs of elective patients, men had less composite adverse outcome (P = .02), operative mortality (P = .04), and renal (P = .02) and respiratory failure (P = .0006). The 5- and 10-year survivals for these men and women were 74.2% versus 71.4% and 50.2% versus 48.2%, respectively (P = .06). All community socioeconomic factors in both propensity-matched groups nonsignificantly favored men. CONCLUSIONS: This study is among the first to examine the association among community socioeconomic factors, gender, and outcomes in patients who undergo proximal aortic surgery. Female gender predicted a composite adverse outcome. In the elective patients, most adverse outcomes were significantly less in men. In the propensity-matched patients, all community socioeconomic factors favored men, although not significantly. Larger studies with patient-level socioeconomic information are needed.

Midterm outcomes of aortic root surgery in patients with Marfan syndrome: A prospective, multicenter, comparative study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare midterm outcomes of aortic valve-replacing root replacement (AVR) and aortic valve-sparing root replacement (AVS) operations in patients with Marfan syndrome. METHODS: Patients who met strict Ghent diagnostic criteria for Marfan syndrome and who underwent either AVR or AVS between March 1, 2005 and December 31, 2010 were enrolled in a 3-year follow-up prospective, multicenter, international registry study; the study was subsequently amended to include 20-year follow-up. Enrollees were followed clinically and echocardiographically. RESULTS: Of the 316 patients enrolled, 77 underwent AVR and 239 underwent AVS; 214 gave reconsent for 20-year follow-up. The median clinical follow-up time for surviving patients was 64 months (interquartile range, 42-66 months). Survival rates for the AVR and AVS groups were similar at 88.2% ± 4.4% and 95.0% ± 1.5%, respectively (P = .1). Propensity score-adjusted competing risk modeling showed associations between AVS and higher cumulative incidences of major adverse valve-related events, valve-related morbidity, combined structural valve deterioration and nonstructural valve dysfunction, and aortic regurgitation ≥2+ (all P < .01). No differences were found for reintervention (P = .7), bleeding (P = .2), embolism (P = .3), or valve-related mortality (P = .8). CONCLUSIONS: Five years postoperatively, major adverse valve-related events and valve-related morbidity were more frequent after AVS than after AVR procedures, primarily because of more frequent aortic valve dysfunction. No between-group differences were found in rates of survival, valve-related mortality, reintervention on the aortic valve, or bleeding. We plan to follow this homogenous cohort for 20 years after aortic root replacement.

Effect of sarcopenia on survival and spinal cord deficit outcomes after thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair in patients 60 years of age and older.

OBJECTIVE: Sarcopenia (core muscle loss) has been used as a surrogate marker of frailty. We investigated whether sarcopenia would adversely affect survival after thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed prospectively collected data from patients aged 60 years or older who underwent thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repairs from 2006 to 2016. Imaging was reviewed by 2 radiologists blinded to clinical outcomes. The total psoas index was derived from total psoas muscle cross-sectional area (cm2) at the mid-L4 level, normalized for height (m2). Patients were divided by sex-specific total psoas index values into sarcopenia (lower third) and nonsarcopenia (upper two-thirds) groups. Multivariable modeling identified operative mortality and spinal cord injury predictors. Unadjusted and adjusted survival curves were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 392 patients identified, those with sarcopenia (n = 131) were older than nonsarcopenic patients (n = 261) (70.0 years vs 68.0 years; P = .02) and more frequently presented with aortic rupture or required urgent/emergency operations. Operative mortality was comparable (sarcopenia 13.7% vs nonsarcopenia 10.0%; P = .3); sarcopenia was not associated with operative mortality in the multivariable model (odds ratio, 1.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-2.77; P = .3). Sarcopenic patients experienced more frequent delayed (13.0% vs 4.6%; P = .005) and persistent (10.7% vs 3.4%; P = .008) paraplegia. Sarcopenia independently predicted delayed paraplegia (odds ratio, 3.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.42-7.08; P = .005) and persistent paraplegia (odds ratio, 3.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.33-8.13; P = .01) in the multivariable model. Adjusted for preoperative/operative covariates, midterm survival was similar for sarcopenic and nonsarcopenic patients (P = .3). CONCLUSIONS: Sarcopenia did not influence early mortality or midterm survival after thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair but was associated with greater risk for delayed and persistent paraplegia.

Early and late outcomes of surgical repair of mycotic aortic aneurysms: A 30-year experience.

OBJECTIVE: Mycotic aortic aneurysm and its associated complications are often catastrophic. In this study, we examined the early and late outcomes of surgical repair of mycotic aortic aneurysm at our center over the last 3 decades. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our prospectively maintained aortic surgery database with supplemental adjudication of medical records. Aortic infection was confirmed through clinical, radiological, intraoperative, pathological, and treatment evidence. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients (median age, 68 years; interquartile range, 62-74) who underwent surgical repair of a mycotic aortic aneurysm between 1992 and 2021 were included. Almost all patients (n = 72; 96%) presented with symptoms, including 26 patients (35%) with rupture, and many underwent urgent or emergency repair (n = 64; 85%). Sixty-one patients underwent open repair, and 14 patients underwent hybrid or endovascular repair. Infection-specific adjunct techniques included rifampin-soaked grafts (n = 16), omental pedicle flaps (n = 21), and antibiotic irrigation catheters (n = 8). There were 15 early deaths (20%), including 10 of the 26 patients (38%) who presented with rupture; however, persistent stroke, paraplegia or paraparesis, and renal failure necessitating dialysis were uncommon (each <5%). Almost all early survivors (52/60; 87%) were discharged with long-term antibiotic therapy. Estimated survival at 2, 6, and 10 years was 55.7% ± 5.8%, 39.0% ± 5.7%, and 26.9% ± 5.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of patients with mycotic aortic aneurysm present with rupture and generally require urgent or emergency repair. Operative mortality and complications are common, especially for patients who present with rupture, and late survival is poor.

Aortic arch repair: lessons learned over three decades at Baylor College of Medicine.

The treatment of complex aortic arch disease continues to be among the most demanding cardiovascular operations, with a considerable risk of death and stroke. Since January 1990, our single-practice service has performed over 3000 repairs of the aortic arch. Our aim was to describe the progression of our technical approach to open aortic arch repair. Our center's surgical technique has evolved considerably over the last three decades. When it comes to initial arterial cannulation, we have shifted away from femoral artery cannulation to innominate and axillary artery cannulation. During difficult repairs, this transition has made it easier to use antegrade cerebral perfusion rather than retrograde cerebral perfusion, which was commonly used in the early days. Brain protection tactics during open aortic arch procedures have evolved from profound (≤14 °C) hypothermia during circulatory arrest to moderate (22-24 °C) hypothermia. Aortic arch repair is performed through a median sternotomy and may treat acute aortic dissection, chronic aortic dissection, or degenerative aneurysm. Reoperative repair - that necessitating redo sternotomy - is common in patients undergoing aortic arch repair. The majority of repairs will include varying portions of the ascending aorta and may involve the aortic valve or the aortic root. In some patients, repair may extend into the proximal descending thoracic aorta; this includes elephant trunk, frozen elephant trunk, and antegrade hybrid approaches.

Endovascular therapy for patients with heritable thoracic aortic disease.

BACKGROUND: Patients with genetic or heritable aortic conditions and thoracic aortic aneurysm syndrome often develop cardiovascular abnormalities originating at the aortic root and affecting the entire thoracoabdominal aorta. Although thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is usually avoided in these patients, TEVAR may be worthwhile for those at high risk for surgical complications and in certain emergency circumstances. We explored indications for TEVAR in patients with suspected or confirmed genetic or heritable aortic conditions and investigated early and mid-term outcomes. METHODS: Our institutional aortic surgery database was queried for patients with suspected or confirmed Marfan syndrome, Loeys-Dietz syndrome, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, Turner syndrome, neurofibromatosis, or familial aortic aneurysm and dissection who underwent TEVAR between February 1, 2002 and October 31, 2020. We extracted operative details and in-hospital, follow-up, and survival data. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients who underwent 40 endovascular interventions met the inclusion criteria; 25 previously underwent ascending aorta or aortic root surgery, and 21 previously underwent open thoracoabdominal surgery. Postoperative complications included respiratory failure (24.3%), cardiac complications (16.2%), renal failure (13.5%), tracheostomy (8.1%), and spinal cord ischemia (paraplegia/paraparesis) (8.1%). Follow-up ranged from 1.3 to 8.5 years (median: 3.6 years), with 15 deaths overall (three early/in-hospital). Thirteen patients (35.1%) had 22 repeat interventions (open and endovascular) post-TEVAR; five had the endograft removed. CONCLUSIONS: Despite consensus that thoracic aneurysms in patients with genetic or heritable aortic conditions should be treated with conventional open surgery, the outcomes from our study suggest that TEVAR might be suitable in emergency settings or for patients in this population who are not candidates for open surgery, who are at high risk for reintervention, or who have a previously implanted Dacron graft. Nonetheless, lifelong surveillance is important for these patients after TEVAR to monitor for new dissection at distal or proximal landing zones, as repeat interventions are frequent.

Differential presentation in acuity and outcomes based on socioeconomic status in patients who undergo thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVES: Socioeconomic differences can lead to differences in how patients present with surgical conditions. We attempted to determine whether socioeconomic status (SES) affects survival outcomes after thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed prospectively collected data from 981 TAAA repairs performed on domestic (noninternational) patients between 2006 and 2016. We excluded patients <18 years old (n = 3), those with no available US home address (n = 114), those not within the race and ethnicity categories assessed (n = 30), and those lost to follow-up (n = 6), leaving 832 repairs for analysis. We derived patient SES by using US Census Bureau data to estimate median household income according to patient home address. Patients were grouped into 3 SES groups: high (n = 283), middle (n = 274), and low (n = 275). Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used to identify predictors of operative mortality. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards regression were used to analyze the association between SES and survival. RESULTS: Operative mortality occurred in 9% (n = 76) of patients. Patients of low SES had greater rates of acute symptoms, dissection, and urgent or emergency TAAA repair. However, lower SES was not an independent predictor of operative death. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards modeling did not show a significant difference in mid-term survival by SES. CONCLUSIONS: In our TAAA series from a single, high-volume practice, SES differences did not appear to influence operative mortality rates. In addition, SES was not associated with a difference in mid-term survival. Efforts to understand and ameliorate the greater acuity of presentation in patients of low SES appear worthwhile.

Sex Differences in Ascending Aortic and Arch Surgery: A Propensity-Matched Comparison of 1153 Pairs.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the relationship of sex with clinical outcomes after proximal aortic (ascending and arch) operations, and whether sex-specific preoperative factors are associated with mortality. METHODS: Of 3745 patients who underwent elective, urgent, and emergency proximal aortic operations over a 30-year period, 1153 pairs of men and women were propensity-matched, and their early and long-term outcomes were compared. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to estimate late survival. RESULTS: Women and men had similar operative mortality (9.1% vs 8.8%, P = .8), stroke (5.7% vs 5.6%, P = .9), and renal failure rates (7.0% vs 6.6%, P = .7). Thirty-day mortality was 7.5% vs 5.6% (P = .06), respectively. Results were less favorable for women than for men regarding respiratory failure (34.3% vs 29.2%, P=0.008) and intensive care unit length of stay (9.11 ± 11.9 vs 7.87 ± 12.48 days; P = .023). Long-term survival was not significantly different between women and men: 66.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 62.8%-69.5%) vs 67.1% (95% CI 63.6%-70.4%) at 5 years, and 45.9% (95% CI 41.76%-50.0%) vs 46.2% (95% CI 41.7%-50.6%) at 10 years (P = .4). Preoperative factors including diabetes, prior stroke, prior renal insufficiency, and peripheral vascular disease were associated with operative mortality in men, whereas chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was the main risk factor in women. CONCLUSIONS: No differences were seen between the sexes in life-changing adverse outcomes after ascending aortic and arch procedures, although specific preoperative variables were associated with specific adverse events. Recognizing differences in preoperative risk factors for mortality between the sexes may facilitate targeted preoperative assessment, preparation, and counseling.

Propensity score analysis in patients with and without previous isolated coronary artery bypass grafting who require proximal aortic and arch surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The risk posed by previous isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients who require proximal aortic or aortic arch surgery is unclear. We compared outcomes of ascending aortic and arch procedures in patients with and without previous CABG. METHODS: Using propensity scores, we created 2 matched groups of patients who underwent proximal aortic surgery, including total arch repairs, at our institution: 126 patients who underwent isolated CABG before the index operation and 126 without previous CABG. Forty-four percent of aortic operations were emergency procedures. Eighty-six patients had a patent previous left internal mammary graft. We compared outcomes between the 2 groups and calculated Kaplan-Meier survival curves. RESULTS: The following outcomes were recorded for the patients with previous isolated CABG versus no CABG: operative mortality, 15.9% versus 11.1% (P = .3); 30-day mortality, 13.5% versus 7.1% (P = .1); persistent stroke, 6.3% versus 4.8% (P = .6); and renal failure necessitating hemodialysis at discharge, 7.9% versus 4.0% (P = .2). Previous CABG did not independently predict any adverse outcome, even though patients who underwent previous CABG more frequently needed intra-aortic balloon support (P < .01). The P value for the overall intergroup difference in long-term survival was .06. CONCLUSIONS: This is one of the largest studies yet reported to examine the impact of previous isolated CABG on proximal aortic or arch surgery outcomes. Although these results may be specific to aortic centers of excellence, in this complicated patient cohort, previous isolated CABG did not independently predict any adverse outcome. These results could serve as a benchmark for assessing future endovascular therapies.

A 23-year experience with the reversed elephant trunk technique for staged repair of extensive thoracic aortic aneurysm.

OBJECTIVE: The reversed elephant trunk technique permits staged repair of extensive thoracic aortic aneurysm in patients whose distal (ie, descending thoracic and thoracoabdominal) aorta is symptomatic or disproportionately large compared with their proximal aorta (ie, ascending aorta and transverse aortic arch). We present our 23-year experience with the reversed elephant trunk approach. METHODS: Between 1994 and 2017, 94 patients (median age 62 [46-69] years) underwent stage 1 reversed elephant trunk repair of the distal aorta. Fifty-three patients (56%) had aortic dissection, and 31 patients (33%) had heritable thoracic aortic disease. Eighty-eight operations (94%) were Crawford extent I or II thoracoabdominal aortic repairs. Twenty-seven patients (29%) underwent subsequent stage 2 repair of the proximal aorta; 14 patients (52%) required redo median sternotomy. The median time between the stage 1 and 2 operations was 18.8 (4.8-69.3) months. RESULTS: The operative mortality was 10% (9/94) for stage 1 repairs and 4% (1/27) for stage 2 repairs; 1 patient with heritable thoracic aortic disease died after stage 1 repair (1/31, 3%), and 1 patient died after stage 2 repair (1/13, 8%). Two patients (2%) had ruptures after stage 1 repair; 1 resulted in death, and 1 precipitated emergency stage 2 repair. In total, 36 patients (38%) who survived stage 1 repair died before stage 2 reversed elephant trunk completion repair could be performed. CONCLUSIONS: Managing extensive aortic aneurysm with the 2-stage reversed elephant trunk technique yields acceptable short-term outcomes. This technique is useful for the reversed elephant trunk in patients who require distal aortic repair before proximal repair and is particularly effective in patients with heritable thoracic aortic disease. The low number of patients returning for completion repair is concerning. Rigorous surveillance is needed.

Staged Repair of Extensive Aneurysms of the Thoracic Aorta by Using the Elephant Trunk Technique.

BACKGROUND: Staged open repair of extensive aortic aneurysms by using the elephant trunk (ET) technique has facilitated the treatment of aortic aneurysms that affect the entire thoracic aorta. We describe our nearly 3-decade experience with classic ET repairs. METHODS: From 1990 through 2021, we performed 363 stage 1 ET repairs to replace the transverse aortic arch in patients with a median age of 65 years (interquartile range, 56-71 years). Fifty-six patients (15.4%) presented with acute symptoms, and 182 (50.1%) underwent redo sternotomy. After a median interval of 3.2 months (interquartile range, 2.0-7.3 months), 203 patients (55.9%) underwent stage 2 ET completion; of these, 16 (7.9%) had acute symptoms. Stage 2 repairs comprised 162 (80.6%) extent I or II thoracoabdominal aortic replacements. We examined postoperative outcomes, including operative death, adverse event (a composite end point), survival, and repair failure. RESULTS: Operative mortality was 12.4% (45 of 363) after stage 1 and 10.3% (21 of 203) after stage 2. The rates of adverse event were 18.5% (67 of 363) for stage 1 and 18.4% (38 of 203) for stage 2. Acute symptoms independently predicted operative death and adverse events for both stage 1 and stage 2 repairs; additional predictors for stage 2 repairs were older age and extent II repair. Survival was significantly worse for patients who did not receive their stage 2 completion repair than for those who did (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Treating extensive aortic aneurysms by using the ET technique for staged repair is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Patients who present with acute symptoms are at greater risk of operative death and adverse events. Diligent surveillance is needed between stages.

Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation for degenerated stentless aortic bioroots.

BACKGROUND: Open surgical repair of a failed valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) or stentless bioroot aortic root replacement (bio-ARR) entails significant operative risks. Whether valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (ViV-TAVR) is feasible in patients with a previous VSARR or stentless bio-ARR remains unclear, given lingering concerns about the ill-defined aortic annulus in these patients and the potential for coronary obstruction. We present our experience with patients who had a previous VSARR or stentless bio-ARR and underwent ViV-TAVR to repair a degenerated aortic valve with combined valvular disease, aortic insufficiency and aortic stenosis. METHODS: In this retrospective data review, we identified and analyzed consecutive patients with a previous VSARR or stentless bio-ARR who underwent ViV-TAVR between December 1, 2014 and August 31, 2019. RESULTS: ViV-TAVR was performed in twelve high-risk patients with previous VSARR or bio-ARR during the study period. Of these, seven received Medtronic Freestyle porcine stentless bioprosthetic aortic roots, three received homograft aortic roots, one underwent a Ross procedure and one underwent VSARR. ViV-TAVR restored satisfactory valve function in all patients, and technical success was 100%. No patient had more than mild regurgitation after implantation. No thirty-day mortality was seen. One patient had major bleeding after transapical access, one patient had a transient ischemic stroke, and one patient needed permanent pacemaker implantation. At a median last follow-up of 21.5 months (interquartile range, 9.0-69.0 months), all patients remained alive and had satisfactory valve function. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, ViV-TAVR was a clinically effective option for treating patients with a failed stentless bio-ARR or previous VSARR. Short-term and intermediate-term results after these procedures were favorable. These findings may have important implications for treating high-risk patients with structural aortic root deterioration and call for better transcatheter heart valves that are suitable for treating aortic insufficiency.

A history of open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair: perspective from Houston.

As late as the early 1950s, ligation, cellophane wrapping, endoluminal wiring, endoaneurysmorrhaphy, and other techniques were well-accepted treatments for aneurysm. Techniques aimed at repair of syphilitic and saccular aneurysms of the proximal aorta were largely unsuitable for the larger, fusiform atherosclerotic aneurysms of the thoracoabdominal aorta. The earliest replacements of the thoracoabdominal aorta relied on the use of donor homografts. Repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) necessitated exposing the thoracic aorta above the diaphragm and the abdominal aorta below the diaphragm. Furthermore, these repairs were complicated by incorporating the branching visceral arteries, as well as the risk of life-threatening distal ischemia during repair. Although many of the early centers for aortic surgery were able to quickly develop aortic banks to prepare and store homografts, in time, it became clear that homografts were not ideal for aortic replacement. The ideal aortic replacement would be nontoxic, hypoallergenic, durable, elastic, pliable, and readily available in multiple sizes and shapes. Although Vinyon-N and other materials were explored as synthetic aortic substitutes, ultimately Dacron (Dacron, Kennesaw, GA, USA) was determined to be the most suitable material for aortic graft replacement. The success of Dacron ushered in extra-anatomic approach to TAAA repair, which remained popular for 2 decades. In time, the graft inclusion technique (which followed an anatomical approach) was adopted, which facilitated shorter repair times and improved outcomes for patients. rotective adjuncts-such as left heart bypass, cerebrospinal fluid drainage, and cold renal perfusion-were incorporated into surgical repair; the historical context of these adjuncts is explored in depth. The success of TAAA repair depends on the contributions of many individuals. The history of TAAA repair continues to evolve and remains indebted to the pioneering heroes, without whom, successful repair would not be possible.