Aggressive Treatment Strategy at Index Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Surgery is Associated with Reduced Need for Short-Term Reintervention in Patients with Aortic Dissection.

INTRODUCTION: Thoracic endovascular aortic surgery (TEVAR) is the modern standard of treatment for patients with Type B aortic dissection, however it is unclear how the initial length of treated aorta affects long-term outcomes. This study aims to elucidate risk factors for secondary intervention after TEVAR for aortic dissection, focusing on length of aortic treatment at index operation. METHODS: A retrospective multihospital chart review was completed for patients treated between 2011 and 2022 who underwent TEVAR for aortic dissection with at least 1 year of post-TEVAR imaging and follow-up. Patient demographics and characteristics were analyzed. In this study, aortic zones treated only included those managed with a covered stent graft. The primary outcome measure was any need for secondary intervention. RESULTS: A total of 151 patients were identified. Demographics included a mean age of 57 years, with 31.8% of the patients being female. Forty-three patients (28.5%) underwent secondary intervention after TEVAR, with a mean follow-up of 1.6 years. The most common indication for secondary intervention was aneurysmal degeneration of the residual false lumen (76%). There was a significant difference in the number of aortic zones treated in patients who did and did not require secondary intervention (2.3 ± 1 vs. 2.7 ± 1, P = 0.04). Additionally, patients with 3 or more aortic zones of treatment had a significant difference in the need for reintervention (32% secondary intervention versus 52% no secondary intervention, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: At least 3 zones of aortic treatment at index TEVAR is associated with a decreased need for overall reintervention. Modern treatment of acute and subacute type B dissection should stress an aggressive initial repair, balanced by the potential increased risk of spinal cord ischemia.

Early trajectories of virological and immunological biomarkers and clinical outcomes in patients admitted to hospital for COVID-19: an international, prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Serial measurement of virological and immunological biomarkers in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 can give valuable insight into the pathogenic roles of viral replication and immune dysregulation. We aimed to characterise biomarker trajectories and their associations with clinical outcomes. METHODS: In this international, prospective cohort study, patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 and enrolled in the Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 platform trial within the Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines programme between Aug 5, 2020 and Sept 30, 2021 were included. Participants were included from 108 sites in Denmark, Greece, Poland, Singapore, Spain, Switzerland, Uganda, the UK, and the USA, and randomised to placebo or one of four neutralising monoclonal antibodies: bamlanivimab (Aug 5 to Oct 13, 2020), sotrovimab (Dec 16, 2020, to March 1, 2021), amubarvimab-romlusevimab (Dec 16, 2020, to March 1, 2021), and tixagevimab-cilgavimab (Feb 10 to Sept 30, 2021). This trial included an analysis of 2149 participants with plasma nucleocapsid antigen, anti-nucleocapsid antibody, C-reactive protein (CRP), IL-6, and D-dimer measured at baseline and day 1, day 3, and day 5 of enrolment. Day-90 follow-up status was available for 1790 participants. Biomarker trajectories were evaluated for associations with baseline characteristics, a 7-day pulmonary ordinal outcome, 90-day mortality, and 90-day rate of sustained recovery. FINDINGS: The study included 2149 participants. Participant median age was 57 years (IQR 46-68), 1246 (58·0%) of 2149 participants were male and 903 (42·0%) were female; 1792 (83·4%) had at least one comorbidity, and 1764 (82·1%) were unvaccinated. Mortality to day 90 was 172 (8·0%) of 2149 and 189 (8·8%) participants had sustained recovery. A pattern of less favourable trajectories of low anti-nucleocapsid antibody, high plasma nucleocapsid antigen, and high inflammatory markers over the first 5 days was observed for high-risk baseline clinical characteristics or factors related to SARS-CoV-2 infection. For example, participants with chronic kidney disease demonstrated plasma nucleocapsid antigen 424% higher (95% CI 319-559), CRP 174% higher (150-202), IL-6 173% higher (144-208), D-dimer 149% higher (134-165), and anti-nucleocapsid antibody 39% lower (60-18) to day 5 than those without chronic kidney disease. Participants in the highest quartile for plasma nucleocapsid antigen, CRP, and IL-6 at baseline and day 5 had worse clinical outcomes, including 90-day all-cause mortality (plasma nucleocapsid antigen hazard ratio (HR) 4·50 (95% CI 3·29-6·15), CRP HR 3·37 (2·30-4·94), and IL-6 HR 5·67 (4·12-7·80). This risk persisted for plasma nucleocapsid antigen and CRP after adjustment for baseline biomarker values and other baseline factors. INTERPRETATION: Patients admitted to hospital with less favourable 5-day biomarker trajectories had worse prognosis, suggesting that persistent viral burden might drive inflammation in the pathogenesis of COVID-19, identifying patients that might benefit from escalation of antiviral or anti-inflammatory treatment. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health.

Extended thoracic endovascular aortic repair is optimal therapy in acute complicated type B dissection.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) represents optimal therapy for complicated acute type B aortic dissection (aTBAD). Persistent knowledge gaps remain, including the optimal length of aortic coverage, impact on distal aortic remodeling, and fate of the dissected abdominal aorta. METHODS: Review of the Emory Aortic Database identified 92 patients who underwent TEVAR for complicated aTBAD from 2012 to 2018. Standard TEVAR covered aortic zones 3 and 4 (from the left subclavian to the mid-descending thoracic aorta). Extended TEVAR fully covered aortic zones 3 though 5 (from the left subclavian to the celiac artery). Long-term imaging, clinical follow-up, and overall and aortic-specific mortality were reviewed. RESULTS: Extended TEVAR (n = 52) required a greater length of coverage vs standard TEVAR (n = 40) (240 ± 32 mm vs 183 ± 23 mm; P < .01). In-hospital mortality occurred in 5.4% of patients (7.7% vs 2.5%; P = .27) owing to mesenteric malperfusion (n = 3) or rupture (n = 2). The overall incidences of postoperative stroke, transient paraparesis, paraplegia, and dialysis were 5.4% (3.9% vs 7.5%; P = .38), 3.2% (5.8% vs 0%; P = .18), 0%, and 0% respectively, equivalent between groups. Follow-up was 96.6% complete to a mean of 6.1 years (interquartile range, 3.5-8.6 years). There were significantly higher rates of complete thrombosis or obliteration of the entire thoracic false lumen after Extended TEVAR (82.2% vs 51.5%; P = .04). Distal aortic reinterventions were less frequent after extended TEVAR (5.8% vs 20%; P = .04). Late aorta-specific survival was 98.1% after extended TEVAR vs 92.3% for standard TEVAR (P = .32). CONCLUSIONS: Extended TEVAR for complicated aTBAD is safe, results in a high rate of total thoracic false lumen thrombosis/obliteration, and reduces distal reinterventions. Longer-term follow-up will be needed to demonstrate a survival benefit compared to limited aortic coverage.

Long-term outcomes after recurrent acute thoracic aortic dissection: Insights from the International Registry of Aortic Dissection.

OBJECTIVE: With an aging population and advancements in imaging, recurrence of thoracic aortic dissection is becoming more common. METHODS: All patients enrolled in the International Registry of Aortic Dissection from 1996 to 2023 with type A and type B acute aortic dissection were identified. Among them, initial dissection and recurrent dissection were discerned. The study period was categorized into 3 eras: historic era, 1996 to 2005; middle era, 2006 to 2015; most recent era, 2016 to 2023. Propensity score matching was applied between initial dissection and recurrent dissection. Outcome of interests included long-term survival and cumulative incidence of major aortic events defined by the composite of reintervention, aortic rupture, and new dissection. RESULTS: The proportion of recurrent dissection increased from 5.9% in the historic era to 8.0% in the most recent era in the entire dissection cohort. In patients with type A dissection, propensity score matching between initial dissection and recurrent dissection yielded 326 matched pairs. Kaplan-Meier curves showed similar long-term survival between the 2 groups. However, the cumulative incidence of major aortic events was significantly higher in the recurrent dissection group (40.3% ± 6.2% vs 17.8% ± 5.1% at 4 years in the initial dissection group, P = .02). For type B dissection, 316 matched pairs were observed after propensity score matching. Long-term survival and the incidence of major aortic events were equivalent between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: The case volume of recurrent dissection or the ability to detect recurrent dissection has increased over time. Acute type A recurrent dissection was associated with a higher risk of major aortic events than initial dissection. Further judicious follow-up may be crucial after type A recurrent dissection.

Acute Type B Intramural Hematoma: Novel Insights in the Endovascular Era.

BACKGROUND: The pathophysiology and behavior of acute type B intramural hematoma (TBIMH) is poorly understood. The purpose of this study is to characterize the pathophysiology, fate, and outcomes of TBIMH in the endovascular era. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of a US Aortic Database identified 70 patients with TBIMH from 2008 to 2022. Patients were divided into groups and analyzed based upon subsequent management: early thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR; Group 1) or hospital discharge on optimal medical therapy (OMT) (Group 2). RESULTS: Of 70 total patients, 43% (30/70) underwent TEVAR (Group 1) and 57% (40/70) were discharged on OMT (Group 2). There were no significant differences in age, demographics, or comorbidities between groups. Indications for TEVAR in Group 1 were as follows: 1) Penetrating atheroscletoic ulcer (PAU) or ulcer-like projection (n = 26); 2) Descending thoracic aortic aneurysm (n = 3); or 3) Progression to type B aortic dissection (TBAD) (n = 2). Operative mortality was zero. No patient suffered a stroke or spinal cord ischemia. During the follow-up period, 50% (20/40) of Group 2 patients required delayed surgical intervention, including TEVAR in 14 patients and open repair in 6 patients. Indications for surgical intervention were as follows: 1) Development of a PAU / ulcer-like projection (n = 13); 2) Progression to TBAD (n = 3), or 3) Concomitant aneurysmal disease (n = 4). Twenty patients did not require surgical intervention. Of the initial cohort, 71% of patients required surgery, 9% progressed to TBAD, and 19% had regression or stability of TBIMH with OMT alone. CONCLUSIONS: The most common etiology of TBIMH is an intimal defect. Progression to TBAD and intramural hematoma regression without an intimal defect occurs in a small percentage of patients. An aggressive strategy with endovascular therapy and close surveillance for TBIMH results in excellent short-term and long-term outcomes.

Acute-on-Chronic Aortic Dissection: Management and Outcomes of the Unstable "Triple-Lumen" Aorta.

BACKGROUND: The impact of acute aortic dissection of the chronically dissected distal aorta is unknown. This study sought to describe the incidence and characteristics of the triple-lumen aortic dissection and its impact on survival. METHODS: From 2010 to 2021, a query of a single-institution aortic database identified 1149 patients with chronic distal aortic dissection. Thirty-three (2.9%) patients with at least 3 distinct lumens and 2 separate "primary" intimal tears were identified by analysis of contrast-enhanced cross-sectional imaging. Triple-lumen patients were exactly matched with a cohort of double-lumen patients on a 1:1 ratio using 5 preoperative variables, and outcomes between the groups were assessed. RESULTS: The median age at time of initial dissection in patients with a triple-lumen dissection was 46 years. Initial dissection was a type A in 33% and a type B in 67% of patients. The median time from initial dissection to triple-lumen diagnosis was 4.2 years. On diagnosis of the triple-lumen aorta, 85% of patients required urgent aortic repair for rapid growth (36%), aortic diameter ≥55 mm (30%), malperfusion (6%), intractable pain (6%), and rupture/type A (6%). Thirty-day mortality after triple lumen dissection was 12%. CONCLUSIONS: Acute-on-chronic distal dissection resulting in a triple-lumen aorta should be classified as a "complicated" type B dissection as these patients typically have large aneurysms and a high incidence of rapid false lumen expansion requiring urgent surgical repair.

National trends in emergency coronary artery bypass grafting.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is often omitted from current research, and volumes as well as outcomes are unknown. The purpose of this research is to examine national trends in emergency CABG. METHODS: The Society of Thoracic Surgeons national adult cardiac surgical database was queried from 2005 to 2017 for patients who underwent emergency and emergency salvage isolated CABG procedures, and 92 607 patients were included for analysis. Generalized linear mixed models were used to assess time trends, taking into account the clustering effect of region. RESULTS: Over the study period, volumes of emergency and emergency salvage CABG declined from 7991 to 6916 cases/year. Emergency and emergency salvage cases accounted for ∼4.9% of all CABG procedures performed nationwide in 2005 and 4.1% in 2017. The predicted risk of mortality (PROM) declined in the entire patient cohort over time from 12% to 8% (P < 0.0001). Rates of important postoperative morbidities also declined including prolonged intubation, re-exploration for haemorrhage and postoperative pneumonia (P < 0.001). Observed-to-expected mortality rates rose over the study period from 0.81 to 1.06 as the overall PROM declined from 9.3% to 7.6%. Emergency salvage CABG rates also declined over the course of the study from 358 to 323 cases/year. The observed-to-expected ratios for mortality increased for emergency salvage CABG during the study from 1.16 to 1.66, and emergency salvage mortality rates averaged 46.5%. CONCLUSIONS: The volume of patients undergoing emergency and emergency salvage CABG in the USA has declined. Increases in mortality are largely driven by emergency salvage cases, and the PROM algorithm may not accurately reflect the risk involved for these patients.

Retrograde Cerebral Perfusion May Decrease Stroke Risk During Elective Aortic Arch Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Controversy remains regarding the optimal neuroprotection strategy for elective hemiarch replacement (HEMI). This study sought to compare outcomes in patients who underwent HEMI utilizing the 2 most common contemporary methods of cerebral protection. METHODS: The ARCH international aortic database was queried, and 782 patients undergoing elective HEMI with circulatory arrest from 2007 to 2012 were identified. There were 418 patients who underwent HEMI using moderate hypothermia (nasopharyngeal temperature 20.1 to 28.0 °C) and antegrade cerebral perfusion (MHCA/ACP). There were 364 patients who underwent HEMI using deep hypothermia (nasopharyngeal temperature 14.1 to 20 °C) and retrograde cerebral perfusion (DHCA/RCP). Adverse outcomes were compared between the groups using both univariable and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: Patients who underwent MHCA/ACP were older (64 vs 61 years, P = 0.01) and more frequently had peripheral vascular disease than DHCA/RCP patients (28.5% vs 7.1%, P < 0.001). Patients in the DHCA/RCP group had a greater incidence of full aortic root replacement (55.8% vs 26.4%, P < 0.001) and more frequently had a central cannulation strategy (83% vs 55.7%, P < 0.001). Cardiopulmonary bypass (170 vs 157 min, P = 0.002) and aortic cross-clamp (134 vs 92 min, P < 0.001) times were significantly longer in the DHCA/RCP group. On univariable analysis, overall mortality was statistically similar between groups (MHCA/ACP 3.4% vs DHCA/RCP 2.3%, P = 0.47), but permanent neurologic deficits were significantly lower in the DHCA/RCP cohort (MHCA/ACP 3.9% vs DHCA/RCP 1.0%, P = 0.02). Multivariable analysis showed no difference in mortality nor perioperative stroke between perfusion cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Both MHCA/ACP and DHCA/RCP are excellent neuroprotective strategies that produce low mortality in patients undergoing elective HEMI. DHCA/RCP may demonstrate theoretically improved neurologic outcomes compared with MHCA/ACP, but this topic warrants further study.

Hybrid Closure of Postinfarction Apical Ventricular Septal Defect Using Septal Occluder Device and Right Ventricular Free Wall: The Apical BASSINET Concept.

BACKGROUND: Postinfarction ventricular septal defect (VSD) is a catastrophic complication of myocardial infarction. Surgical repair still has poor outcomes. This report describes clinical outcomes after a novel hybrid transcatheter/surgical repair in patients with apical VSD. METHODS: Seven patients with postmyocardial infarction apical VSD underwent hybrid transcatheter repair via subxiphoid surgical access. A transcatheter occluder (Amplatzer Septal Occluder) with a trailing premounted suture was deployed through the right ventricular wall and through the ventricular septum into the left ventricular apex. The trailing suture was used to connect an anchor external to the right ventricular wall. Tension on the suture then collapses the right ventricular free wall against the septum and left ventricular occluder, thereby obliterating the VSD. Outcomes were compared with 9 patients who underwent surgical repair using either patch or primary suture closure. RESULTS: All patients had significant left-to-right shunt (Qp:Qs 2.5:1; interquartile range [IQR, 2.1-2.6] hybrid repair versus 2.0:1 [IQR, 2.0-2.5] surgical repair), and elevated right ventricular systolic pressure (62 [IQR, 46-71] versus 49 [IQR, 43-54] mm Hg, respectively). All had severely depressed stroke volume index (22 versus 21 mL/m2) with ≈45% in each group requiring mechanical support preprocedurally. The procedure was done 15 (IQR, 10-50) versus 24 (IQR, 10-134) days postmyocardial infarction, respectively. Both groups of patients underwent repair with technical success and without intraprocedural death. One patient in the hybrid group and 4 in the surgical group developed multiorgan failure. The hybrid group had a higher survival at discharge (86% versus 56%) and at 30 days (71% versus 56%), but similar at 1 year (57% versus 56%). During follow-up, 1 patient in each group required reintervention for residual VSD (hybrid: 9 months versus surgical: 5 days). CONCLUSIONS: Early intervention with a hybrid transcatheter/surgical repair may be a viable alternative to traditional surgery for postinfarction apical VSD.

Bentall versus valve-sparing aortic root replacement for root pathology with moderate-to-severe aortic insufficiency: a propensity-matched analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To examine short- and long-term outcomes of patients with moderate-to-severe aortic insufficiency (AI) undergoing either a Bentall aortic root replacement (ARR) or valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR). METHODS: A two-centre retrospective database of patients undergoing ARR from 2004 to 2021 was reviewed. Patients <18 years old were excluded. A total of 1527 adult patients underwent Bentall ARR (n = 1150, 75%) or VSRR (n = 377, 25%). Propensity score matching based on preoperative comorbidities was used and 195 matched pairs were identified. Perioperative outcomes, reoperation rates, recurrence of AI and long-term survival were evaluated. RESULTS: ARR patients had more concomitant ascending aortic replacement (35% vs 20%, P = 0.002) and shorter cardiopulmonary bypass (189 vs 233 min, P < 0.0001) and aortic cross-clamp (170 vs 204 min, P < 0.0001) times than the VSRR group. Postoperatively, outcomes were similar between groups, including stroke (3% vs 2%) and in-hospital mortality (1.5% vs 2.1%), all P > 0.05. Indications for and rates of reoperation (4% vs 5%, P = 0.62) of the aortic valve and proximal aorta were similar between ARR and VSRR groups with reoperations occurring a mean of 3.2 years after initial root replacement. The ARR group had less moderate-to-severe AI than the VSRR group (1.6% vs 14%, P = 0.002) a mean of 3 years after surgery. Ten-year survival was similar between ARR (84%) and VSRR (82%) (P = 0.69) groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both ARR and VSRR can be performed with acceptable short- and long-term outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe AI.

Trends in surgical aortic valve replacement in pre- and post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement eras at a structural heart center.

Background: The advent of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has directly impacted the lifelong management of patients with aortic valve disease. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved TAVR for all surgical risk: prohibitive (2011), high (2012), intermediate (2016), and low (2019). Since then, TAVR volumes are increasing and surgical aortic valve replacements (SAVR) are decreasing. This study sought to evaluate trends in isolated SAVR in the pre- and post-TAVR eras. Methods: From January 2000 to June 2020, 3,861 isolated SAVRs were performed at a single academic quaternary care institution which participated in the early trials of TAVR beginning in 2007. A formal structural heart center was established in 2012 when TAVR became commercially available. Patients were divided into the pre-TAVR era (2000-2011, n = 2,426) and post-TAVR era (2012-2020, n = 1,435). Data from the institutional Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database was analyzed. Results: The median age was 66 years, similar between groups. The post-TAVR group had a statistically higher rate of diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, heart failure, more reoperative SAVR, and lower STS Predicted Risk of Mortality (PROM) (2.0% vs. 2.5%, p < 0.0001). There were more urgent/emergent/salvage SAVRs (38% vs. 24%) and fewer elective SAVRs (63% vs. 76%), (p < 0.0001) in the post-TAVR group. More bioprosthetic valves were implanted in the post-TAVR group (85% vs. 74%, p < 0.0001). Larger aortic valves were implanted (25 vs. 23 mm, p < 0.0001) and more annular enlargements were performed (5.9% vs. 1.6%, p < 0.0001) in the post-TAVR era. Postoperatively, the post-TAVR group had less blood product transfusion (49% vs. 58%, p < 0.0001), renal failure (1.4% vs. 4.3%, p < 0.0001), pneumonia (2.3% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.01), shorter lengths of stay, and lower in-hospital mortality (1.5% vs. 3.3%, p = 0.0007). Conclusion: The approval of TAVR changed the landscape of aortic valve disease management. At a quaternary academic cardiac surgery center with a well-established structural heart program, patients undergoing isolated SAVR in the post-TAVR era had lower STS PROM, more implantation of bioprosthetic valves, utilization of larger valves, annular enlargement, and lower in-hospital mortality. Isolated SAVR continues to be performed in the TAVR era with excellent outcomes. SAVR remains an essential tool in the lifetime management of aortic valve disease.

Bicuspid aortic valve durability with valve-sparing aortic root replacement: comparison to tricuspid valve.

OBJECTIVES: Outcomes beyond 10 years for David V valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR) in bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) patients have yet to be explored. We investigated long-term outcomes after BAV VSARR compared to VSARR for tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) patients. METHODS: A total of 677 patients with BAV (n = 171) and TAV (n = 506) underwent VSARR between 2005 and 2020 from 2 aortic centres, excluding those with dissection, endocarditis, stenosis or prior aortic valve (AV) surgery. Multivariable Cox regression compared adjusted survival over a 12-year period. Fine and Gray competing risk regression compared risk and cumulative incidence of reoperation/reintervention. Propensity score matching created balanced groups, and landmark analysis isolated outcomes beginning 4 years postoperatively. Finally, longitudinal mixed modelling assessed AV deterioration on echocardiogram. RESULTS: No difference was observed in 12-year survival of BAV versus TAV (propensity score matching 92.0% vs 89.9%, P = 0.97; multivariable hazard ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.34-1.69, P = 0.51). Adjusted 12-year cumulative incidence and risk of AV and/or proximal aorta reoperation/reintervention were not observed to be different (15.7% BAV vs 5.7% TAV, P = 0.37; subdistribution hazard ratio 1.54, 95% confidence interval 0.60-3.94, P = 0.36); however, landmark analysis showed increased incidence of late reoperation/reintervention in BAV versus TAV (11.7% vs 0.0%, P = 0.04). BAV was not associated with AV deterioration over time (BAV coefficient ± standard error: 0 ± 0.30, P = 1). CONCLUSIONS: VSARR for BAV patients has excellent 12-year survival and low reoperation/reintervention rates, which were not observed to be different from TAV patients. However, higher incidence of reoperation/reintervention was observed in the late years after BAV VSARR. Our study provides key information for surgical consultation of patients with bicuspid aortopathy.

Prolonged Periods of Antegrade Cerebral Perfusion Are Safe During Elective Arch Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Cerebral circulatory arrest times >40 minutes during aortic surgery have previously been shown to be associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study was to redefine what would constitute a safe period of circulatory arrest for patients who underwent elective proximal aortic operations requiring antegrade cerebral perfusion (ACP). METHODS: The ARCH International aortic database was queried, and 2008 patients undergoing elective arch operations with circulatory arrest using ACP were identified. Circulatory arrest time was categorized a priori in 10-minute intervals. To further determine the impact of this variable on outcomes, hierarchical multivariable regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: Unadjusted mortality increased with increasing circulatory arrest time from 4.8% (<40 minutes) to 13.5% (>90 minutes; P < .001), but risk of stroke was not impacted (P = .4). When treated as a continuous variable, mortality increased significantly with increasing circulatory arrest time, whereas the risk of permanent stroke did not. Using <40 minutes as the reference, multivariable analysis showed no statistical increase in mortality for ranges up to 80 minutes of circulatory arrest. The risk of permanent stroke was not significantly higher for any time interval >40 minutes up to 90 minutes. CONCLUSIONS: In this series of patients who underwent elective proximal aortic surgery using ACP, periods of circulatory arrest up to at least 80 minutes were not associated with significant increases in mortality or permanent stroke. Modern perfusion strategies have allowed for increased safety during elective arch cases requiring prolonged periods of circulatory arrest.

Early Results of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair for the Management of Acute Uncomplicated Type B Aortic Dissection.

Historically, optimal medical therapy (OMT) has been the primary therapy for acute uncomplicated type B aortic dissection (auTBAD). However, recent data suggest that OMT provides poor long-term results, and aortic remodeling induced by thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) may improve survival. This study compares adverse events and survival among auTBAD patients receiving either TEVAR or OMT. A retrospective analysis identified 146 consecutive auTBAD patients presenting to a single institution between 1/2012 and 10/2020. Patients were divided into 2 groups based upon whether they received TEVAR (n = 50) or OMT (n = 96) at index hospitalization. Major morbidity and survival were compared between groups. 67.1% of patients presented with a Debakey IIIB dissection with maximum thoracic aortic diameter of 4.3 ± 1.0 cm. Over follow-up, 35% of OMT patients failed medical therapy and underwent intervention (n = 23 TEVAR, n = 11 open). An additional 13 died for an all-cause failure rate of 49%. The composite incidence of renal failure, stroke, spinal cord ischemia, and retrograde type A dissections was similar between groups (TEVAR:6.0% vs OMT:4.2%). In-hospital mortality was 0%. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated a trend towards improved survival among the TEVAR group at 1 and 3 years but no difference in overall survival (HR:0.30, 95% CI:0.08-1.08, P = 0.066). Five-year survival was 91% with TEVAR and 82% with OMT. Complete false lumen thrombosis was achieved in 72.1% with TEVAR and 20.0% with OMT (P < 0.001). In experienced centers, there is equivalent early mortality in the treatment of auTBAD with TEVAR compared to OMT. TEVAR provides superior aortic remodeling to OMT in auTBAD, which may translate into improved long-term survival.

Acute Kidney Injury in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Type A Acute Aortic Dissection.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) after repair of type A acute aortic dissection (TAAAD) has been shown to affect both short- and long-term outcomes. This study aimed to validate the impact of postoperative AKI on in-hospital and long-term outcomes in a large population of dissection patients presenting to multinational aortic centers. Additionally, we assessed risk factors for AKI including surgical details. METHODS: Patients undergoing surgical repair for TAAAD enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection database were evaluated to determine the incidence and risk factors for the development of AKI. RESULTS: A total of 3307 patients were identified. There were 761 (23%) patients with postoperative AKI (AKI group) vs 2546 patients without (77%, non-AKI group). The AKI group had a higher rate of in-hospital mortality (n = 193, 25.4% vs n = 122, 4.8% in the non-AKI group, P < .001). Additional postoperative complications were also more common in the AKI group including postoperative cerebrovascular accident, reexploration for bleeding, and prolonged ventilation. Independent baseline characteristics associated with AKI included a history of hypertension, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, evidence of malperfusion on presentation, distal extent of dissection to abdominal aorta, and longer cardiopulmonary bypass time. Kaplan-Meier survival curves revealed decreased 5-year survival among the AKI group (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: AKI occurs commonly after TAAAD repair and is associated with a significantly increased risk of operative and long-term mortality. In this large study using the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection database, several factors were elucidated that may affect risk of AKI.

A Randomized Trial of Mesenchymal Stromal Cells for Moderate to Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome from COVID-19.

Rationale: There are limited therapeutic options for patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19)-related acute respiratory distress syndrome with inflammation-mediated lung injury. Mesenchymal stromal cells offer promise as immunomodulatory agents. Objectives: Evaluation of efficacy and safety of allogeneic mesenchymal cells in mechanically-ventilated patients with moderate or severe COVID-19-induced respiratory failure. Methods: Patients were randomized to two infusions of 2 million cells/kg or sham infusions, in addition to the standard of care. We hypothesized that cell therapy would be superior to sham control for the primary endpoint of 30-day mortality. The key secondary endpoint was ventilator-free survival within 60 days, accounting for deaths and withdrawals in a ranked analysis. Measurements and Main Results: At the third interim analysis, the data and safety monitoring board recommended that the trial halt enrollment as the prespecified mortality reduction from 40% to 23% was unlikely to be achieved (n = 222 out of planned 300). Thirty-day mortality was 37.5% (42/112) in cell recipients versus 42.7% (47/110) in control patients (relative risk [RR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.21; P = 0.43). There were no significant differences in days alive off ventilation within 60 days (median rank, 117.3 [interquartile range, 60.0-169.5] in cell patients and 102.0 [interquartile range, 54.0-162.5] in control subjects; higher is better). Resolution or improvement of acute respiratory distress syndrome at 30 days was observed in 51/104 (49.0%) cell recipients and 46/106 (43.4%) control patients (odds ratio, 1.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.57-3.21). There were no infusion-related toxicities and overall serious adverse events over 30 days were similar. Conclusions: Mesenchymal cells, while safe, did not improve 30-day survival or 60-day ventilator-free days in patients with moderate and/or severe COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Redo aortic surgery: Does one versus multiple affect outcomes?

Objective: Redo aortic surgery has a higher risk of morbidity and mortality because it is technically complex due to mediastinal adhesions, infection, and previously implanted prostheses. In this study, we sought to benchmark our single-center experience comparing outcomes in patients undergoing aortic surgery after 1 versus multiple previous cardiac operations. Methods: Between 2004 and 2019, 429 patients underwent redo aortic surgery. They were classified as aortic surgery after 1 previous surgery (first redo surgery, n = 360) and aortic surgery after 2 or more (multiple) previous surgeries (multiple redo surgery, n = 69). Postoperative outcomes and long-term survival were compared, and risk factors for mortality were identified. Results: Thirty-day mortality was lower in first redo surgery compared with multiple redo surgery (12.3% vs 21.7%, P = .03). Age, cardiopulmonary bypass time, intra-aortic balloon pump use, postoperative cerebrovascular accident, absence of postoperative atrial fibrillation, intra-aortic balloon pump, and multiple redo surgery were independent predictors of 30-day mortality. Long-term survival was similar at 15 years. Patients who received first redo surgery were older (57.9 ± 14.0 years vs 50.3 ± 15.8 years, P = .0001) and had a higher incidence of hypertension (84.7% vs 73.9%, P = .02), whereas patients who received multiple redo surgery had a higher incidence of cerebrovascular disease (31.9% vs 20.3%, P = .03). Aortic valve replacement was the most common previous operation with higher incidence in multiple redo surgery. Incidence of previous aortic surgery was similar. Cardiopulmonary bypass (246 ± 67.3 minutes vs 219.9 ± 57.5 minutes, P = .009) and crossclamp times (208.2 ± 51.8 vs 181.9 ± 50.8 minutes, P = .004) were longer in multiple redo surgery. Incidence of reentry injury and balloon pump insertion were similar. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use was higher in multiple redo surgery. Postoperative complications occurred at similar rates, except for higher incidence of dialysis in multiple redo surgery (14.5% vs 7.2%, P = .04). Conclusions: Multiple redo aortic procedures have a higher morbidity and mortality compared with first redo aortic procedures, with linearly increasing short-term mortality risk but similar long-term survival with the number of redo procedures.

True redo-aortic root replacement versus root replacement after any previous surgery.

Objective: The impact of previous aortic root replacement (True-Redo) versus any previous operation (Any-Redo) on outcomes after reoperative aortic root replacement (redo-ROOT) is largely unknown. In this first multi-institutional study, the clinical impact True-Redo versus Any-Redo in the setting of redo-ROOT was reviewed. Methods: From 2004 to 2021, 822 patients underwent redo-ROOT at 2 major academic centers: 638 Any-Redo and 184 True-Redo. Matching based on preoperative demographics and concomitant operations resulted in 174 matched pairs. An independent risk factor analysis was performed to determine risk factors for early and late mortality. Results: Patients in the True-Redo group were younger, at 49.9 ± 15.1 versus 55.3 ± 14.7 years, P < .001. Concomitant operations were largely similar between the 2 groups, P > .05. Median cardiopulmonary bypass time (P < .001) and aortic crossclamp time (P = .03) were longer for True-Redo group. In-hospital mortality was 13% (109) and was without significant difference between groups, P = .41. Ten-year survival was 78% versus 76% for True-Redo versus Any-Redo groups respectively, P = .7. Landmark survival analysis at 4 years' postoperatively on the matched groups found that patients in the True-Redo group had improved survival outcomes (P = .046). Risk factors of in-hospital mortality consisted of older age (P < .0001), lower ejection fraction (P = .02), and male patient (P = .0003). Conclusions: Clinical outcomes following redo-ROOT are excellent. Performance of a True-Redo-ROOT does not result in worse in-hospital morbidity or mortality and has improved survival benefit at midterm follow-up when compared with patients in the Any-Redo group. The decision to perform a redo-ROOT must be taken seriously and must be individualized in a patient-specific manner for optimal outcomes.