Patient-specific ascending aortic intervention criteria.

OBJECTIVES: Ascending aortic aneurysms pose a different risk to each patient. We aim to provide personalized risk stratification for such patients based on sex, age, body surface area and aneurysm location (root versus ascending). METHODS: Root and ascending diameters, and adverse aortic events (dissection, rupture, death) of ascending thoracic aortic aneurysm patients were analysed. Aortic diameter was placed in context vis-a-vis the normal distribution in the general population with similar sex, age and body surface area, by conversion to z scores. These were correlated of major adverse aortic events, producing risk curves with 'hinge points' of steep risk, constructed separately for the aortic root and mid-ascending aorta. RESULTS: A total of 1162 patients were included. Risk curves unveiled generalized thresholds of z = 4 for the aortic root and z = 5 for the mid-ascending aorta. These correspond to individualized thresholds of less than the standard criterion of 5.5 cm in the vast majority of patients. Indicative results include a 75-year-old typical male with 2.1 m2 body surface area, who was found to be at increased risk of adverse events if root diameter exceeds 5.15 cm, or mid ascending exceeds 5.27 cm. An automated calculator is presented, which identifies patients at high risk of adverse events based on sex, age, height, weight, and root and ascending size. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis exploits a large sample of aneurysmal patients, demographic features of the general population, pre-dissection diameter, discrimination of root and supracoronary segments, and statistical tools to extract thresholds of increased risk tailor-made for each patient.

Bicuspid aortopathy does not require earlier surgical intervention.

OBJECTIVES: Guidelines for surgical correction of patients with ascending thoracic aortic aneurysm (ATAA) with a bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) have oscillated over the years. In this study, we outline the natural history of the ascending aorta in patients with BAV and trileaflet aortic valve (TAV) ATAA followed over time, to ascertain if their behavior differs and to determine if a different threshold for intervention is required. METHODS: Aortic diameters and long-term complications (ie, adverse aortic events) of 2428 patients (554 BAV and 1874 TAV) with ATAA before operative repair were reviewed. Growth rates, yearly complication rates, event-free survival, and risk of complications as a function of aortic size were calculated. Long-term follow-up and precise cause of death granularity was achieved via a comprehensive 6-pronged approach. RESULTS: Aortic growth rate in patients with BAV vs TAV ATAA was 0.20 and 0.17 cm/year, respectively (P = .009), with the rate increasing with increasing aortic size. Yearly adverse aortic events rates increased with ATAA size and were lower for patients with BAV. The relative risk of adverse aortic events exhibited an exponential increase with aortic diameter. Patients with BAV had a lower all-cause and ascending aorta-specific adverse aortic events hazard. Age-adjusted 10-year event-free survival was significantly better for patients with BAV, and BAV emerged as a protective factor against type A dissection, rupture, and ascending aortic death. CONCLUSIONS: The threshold for surgical repair of ascending aneurysm with BAV should not differ from that of TAV. Prophylactic surgery should be considered at 5.0 cm for patients with TAV (and BAV) at expert centers.

Root Dilatation Is More Malignant Than Ascending Aortic Dilation.

Background Data from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection indicate that the guideline criterion of 5.5 cm for ascending aortic intervention misses many dissections occurring at smaller dimensions. Furthermore, studies of natural behavior have generally treated the aortic root and the ascending aorta as 1 unit despite embryological, anatomical, and functional differences. This study aims to disentangle the natural histories of the aforementioned aortic segments, allowing natural behavior to define specific intervention criteria for root and ascending segments of the aorta. Methods and Results Diameters of the aortic root and mid-ascending segment were measured separately. Long-term complications (dissection, rupture, and death) were analyzed retrospectively for 1162 patients with ascending thoracic aortic aneurysm. Cox regression analysis suggested that aortic root dilatation (P=0.017) is more significant in predicting adverse events than mid-ascending aortic dilatation (P=0.087). Short stature posed as a serious risk factor. The dedicated risk curves for the aortic root and the mid-ascending aorta revealed hinge points at 5.0 and 5.25 cm, respectively. Conclusions The natural histories of the aortic root and mid-ascending aorta are uniquely different. Dilation of the aortic root imparts a significant higher risk of adverse events. A diameter shift for intervention to 5.0 cm for the aortic root and to 5.25 cm for the mid-ascending aorta should be considered at expert centers.