Decision-making algorithm for ascending aortic aneurysm: Effectiveness in clinical application?

OBJECTIVE: The risk of rupture and dissection in ascending thoracic aortic aneurysms increases as the aortic diameter exceeds 5 cm. This study evaluates the clinical effectiveness of a specific algorithm based on size and symptoms for preemptive surgery to prevent complications. METHODS: A total of 781 patients with nondissecting ascending thoracic aortic aneurysms who presented electively for evaluation to our institution from 2011 to 2017 were triaged to surgery (n = 607, 77%) or medical observation (n = 181, 24%) based on a specific algorithm: surgery for large (>5 cm) or symptomatic aneurysms. A total of 309 of 781 patients did not undergo surgery. Of these, 128 (16%) had been triaged to prompt repair but did not undergo surgery for a variety of reasons ("surgery noncompliant and overwhelming comorbidities" group). Another 181 patients (24%) were triaged to medical management ("medical" group). RESULTS: In the "surgery noncompliant and overwhelming comorbidities" versus the "medical" group, mean aortic diameters were 5 ± 0.5 cm versus 4.45 ± 0.4 cm and aortic events (rupture/dissection) occurred in 17 patients (13.3%) versus 3 patients (1.7%), respectively (P < .001). Later elective surgeries (representing late compliance in the "surgery noncompliant and overwhelming comorbidities group" or onset of growth or symptoms in the "medical" group) were conducted in 21 patients (16.4%) versus 15 patients (8.3%) (P = .04), respectively. Death ensued in 20 patients (15.6%) versus 6 patients (3.3%) (P < .001), respectively. In the "surgery noncompliant and overwhelming comorbidities" group, 7 of 20 patients died of definite aortic causes compared with none in the "medical" group. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ascending thoracic aortic aneurysms who did not follow surgical recommendations experienced substantially worse outcomes compared with medically triaged candidates. The specific algorithm based on size and symptoms functioned effectively in the clinical setting, correctly identifying both at-risk and safe patients.

Height alone, rather than body surface area, suffices for risk estimation in ascending aortic aneurysm.

BACKGROUND: In international guidelines, risk estimation for thoracic ascending aortic aneurysm (TAAA) is based on aortic diameter. We previously introduced the aortic size index (ASI), defined as aortic size/body surface area (BSA), as a predictor of aortic dissection, rupture, and death. However, weight might not contribute substantially to aortic size and growth. We seek to evaluate the height-based aortic height index (AHI) versus ASI for risk estimation and revisit our natural history calculations. METHODS: Aortic diameters and long-term complications of 780 patients with TAAA were analyzed. Growth rate estimates, yearly complication rates, and survival were assessed. Risk stratification was performed using regression models. The predictive value of AHI and ASI was compared. RESULTS: Patients were stratified into 4 categories of yearly risk of complications based on their ASI and AHI. ASIs (cm/m2) of ≤2.05, 2.08 to 2.95, 3.00 to 3.95 and ≥4, and AHIs (cm/m) of ≤2.43, 2.44 to 3.17, 3.21 to 4.06, and ≥4.1 were associated with a 4%, 7%, 12%, and 18% average yearly risk of complications, respectively. Five-year complication-free survival was progressively worse with increasing ASI and AHI. Both ASI and AHI were shown to be significant predictors of complications (P < .05). AHI categories 3.05 to 3.69, 3.70 to 4.34, and ≥4.35 cm/m were associated with a significantly increased risk of complications (P < .05). The overall fit of the model using AHI was modestly superior according to the concordance statistic. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with indices including weight, the simpler height-based ratio (excluding weight and BSA calculations) yields satisfactory results for evaluating the risk of natural complications in patients with TAAA.

Elective surgery for ascending aortic aneurysm in the elderly: should there be an age cut-off?

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to retrospectively analyse surgical outcomes in patients aged 75-79, and 80 and above. METHODS: Between 2000 and 2015, 108 patients aged 75-79 (G 75 , mean age 76.9 ± 1.5years) and 72 patients aged 80 and above (G 80 , mean age 82.2 ± 2.1years) underwent elective aneurysm repair. Operative outcome and survival was compared with 727 contemporary younger counterparts aged <75 years (G Ctrl , mean age 56.6 ± 11.7years). RESULTS: Postoperatively, patients with advanced age showed a higher incidence of prolonged ventilation (G 80 21.4%, G 75 8.4%, G Ctrl 2.9%; P < 0.001), low cardiac output syndrome (G 80 11.4%, G 75 1.9%, G Ctrl 2.2%; P = 0.001), multi organ failure (G 80 2.9%, G 75 0%, G Ctrl 0.1%; P = 0.022), haemofiltration (G 80 8.6%, G 75 0.9%, G Ctrl 0.6%; P < 0.001), and infection (G 80 10.0%, G 75 6.5%, G Ctrl 3.5%; P = 0.017). Operative mortality was significantly increased in the elderly (G 80 11.1%, G 75 3.7%, G Ctrl 1.4%; P < 0.001). Mid-term survival differed significantly between the surgical groups. Multivariate regression analysis precluded age as an independent predictor of operative mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Elderly patients showed a higher operative risk compared to their younger counterparts. However, age per se is no suitable indicator of surgical risk and well-selected patients with large threatening aneurysms may benefit from intervention.