Influence of preoperative and intraoperative factors on recovery after aortic root surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the influence of intraoperative factors relative to preoperative risk factors on recovery after aortic root replacement (ARR). METHODS: Retrospective review of baseline and intraoperative characteristics was performed of 822 patients at our Aortic Center from 2005 to 2019. Inclusion criteria were all patients age 18 and older who underwent ARR at our institution from 2005 to 2019. The primary endpoint was the aggregate outcome of "failure to achieve uneventful recovery (FUR)," as previously defined. RESULTS: In total, 207 (25%) patients experienced FUR. The following preoperative and intraoperative variables were significantly associated with FUR in the multivariable analysis: cardiopulmonary bypass time (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.01-1.02) open chest management (OR 5.67, 95% CI 2.65-12.1), ejection fraction (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.04), chronic kidney disease > stage 3a (OR 2.37, 95% CI 1.54-3.63), bicuspid aortic valve (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.21-1.96), and female sex (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.06-1.61). Cardiopulmonary bypass time and open chest management were among the top three partial R2 contributors to the logistic regression model variance. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest efficacy in using intraoperative parameters to predict postoperative outcomes after ARR.

Quantifying the effects of circulatory arrest on acute kidney injury in aortic surgery.

OBJECTIVES: We aim to investigate the association between parameters surrounding circulatory arrest and postoperative acute kidney injury in aortic surgery. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective study of 1118 adult patients who underwent aortic repair with median sternotomy between January 2010 and May 2019. Acute kidney injury was defined on the basis of a modified version of the 2012 Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes Scale that excluded urine output. The primary outcome of interest was any stage of acute kidney injury. RESULTS: Circulatory arrest was required in 369 patients, and 307 patients (27.5%) developed acute kidney injury: stage 1 in 241 patients, stage 2 in 38 patients, and stage 3 in 28 patients. Lower-body ischemia (the period during circulatory arrest without blood flow to kidneys) duration was not associated with acute kidney injury after multivariable logistic regression (1-40 minutes, odds ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-1.04; P = .075; >40 minutes, odds ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-1.55; P = .356). Hypertension (odds ratio, 1.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-2.54; P = .020), preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.00; P = .010), packed red blood cell transfusion volume (odds ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.00; P = .028), and nadir temperature (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.88-0.99; P = .013) were independently associated with acute kidney injury after multivariable analysis. Although there was a positive association between lower-body ischemia duration and development of acute kidney injury with univariable cubic spline, the positive curve was flattened after adjustment for the described variables. CONCLUSIONS: Within the range of our clinical practice, prolonged lower-body ischemia duration was not independently associated with postoperative acute kidney injury, whereas nadir temperature was.

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.

Left ventricular remodeling following septal myectomy in hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy.

Objectives: The purpose of this study is to determine whether or not left ventricular remodeling can be induced after septal myectomy in patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, and if so, how it occurs, using gated cardiac computed tomography. Methods: Fifty patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy who underwent septal myectomy along the septal band between March 2016 and July 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Recent consecutive 19 patients underwent postoperative cardiac computed tomography. In these patients, volumes of the septal band and thickness of 17 left ventricular myocardial segments were measured to determine the changes after surgery. Results: The resection volume predicted by preoperative computed tomography and the actual resection volume were 6.7 ± 3.3 mL and 6.4 ± 2.7 mL. In-hospital mortality was 0%. Moderate or greater mitral valve regurgitation and systolic anterior motion decreased from 56% to 6% and 86% to 6%, respectively. Median preoperative ventricular septal thickness and left ventricular outflow tract pressure gradient at rest decreased from 20.0 mm (interquartile range, 17.0-24.0 mm) and 74.0 mm Hg (interquartile range, 42.5-92.5 mm Hg) to 14.0 mm (interquartile range, 11.5-16.0 mm) and 15.5 mm Hg (interquartile range, 12.1-21.5 mm Hg), respectively. Postoperative computed tomography confirmed a reduction in septal band volume of 5.7 ± 2.8 mL. Total left ventricular myocardial volume was reduced by 12.9 ± 8.8 mL, which exceeded the volume reduction of the resected septal band. All segments except the basal inferior and basal inferolateral regions showed a significant decrease in wall thickness by a median of 6.4%. Conclusions: Properly performed septal myectomy may induce remodeling of the entire left ventricle, not just the resected area.

Long-term outcome of hemiarch replacement in a proximal aortic aneurysm repair: analysis of over 1000 patients.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of hemiarch replacement in patients undergoing an open repair of proximal thoracic aortic aneurysm without arch aneurysm. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on 1132 patients undergoing proximal aortic aneurysm repair at our Aortic Center between 2005 and 2019. Inclusion criteria were all patients undergoing root or ascending aortic aneurysm repair with or without hemiarch replacement. Exclusion criteria were age <18 years, aortic arch diameter ≥4.5 cm, type A aortic dissection, previous ascending aortic replacement, ruptured aneurysm and endocarditis. Propensity score matching in a 2:1 ratio (573 non-hemiarch: 288 hemiarch) on 19 baseline characteristics was performed. The median follow-up time was 46.8 months (range 0.1-170.4 months). RESULTS: Hemiarch patients had significantly lower 10-year survival in the matched cohort (hemiarch 73.8%; 66.9-81.4%; vs non-hemiarch 86.5%; 81.1-92.3%; P < 0.001), driven by higher in-hospital mortality rate (4% vs 1%; P < 0.001). Cumulative incidence of aortic arch reintervention rates at 10 years was similarly low (hemiarch 1.0%; 0-2.5% vs non-hemiarch 1.3%; 0-2.6%, P = 0.615). Multivariate analysis with hazard ratios of the overall cohort showed hemiarch as an independent factor associated with long-term mortality (2.16; 1.42-3.27; P < 0.001) but not with aortic arch reintervention (0.76; 0.14-4.07, P = 0.750). CONCLUSIONS: Hemiarch repair may be associated with higher short-term mortality compared to non-hemiarch. Arch reintervention was rare after a repair of proximal thoracic aortic aneurysm without arch aneurysm. Our data call for larger and prospective studies to further delineate the utility of hemiarch repair in proximal aortic surgery.

Valve-Sparing Root Replacement Versus Bio-Bentall: Inverse Propensity Weighting of 796 Patients.

BACKGROUND: This large cohort, single-center study compared the 10-year survival and freedom from aortic valve reintervention between valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) and bioprosthetic Bentall (bio-Bentall). METHODS: All patients undergoing elective VSRR or bio-Bentall for aortic root aneurysm between March 2005 through October 2019 were retrospectively reviewed (N = 796; n = 360 for VSRR). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) balanced clinical variables between groups. Mean follow-up was 58.0 ± 45.4 months (range, 0-167 months). RESULTS: After IPTW adjustment, 10-year survival did not differ between VSRR (87.0%) and bio-Bentall (92.7%, P = 0.780). Cumulative incidence of aortic valve reintervention was 5.9% for VSRR (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.9%-10.4%) and 10.6% for bio-Bentall (95% CI, 6.2%-16.4%; P = .798). A Fine and Gray competing risk regression model identified age at operation (subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.99; P = .015), body surface area (sHR, 6.21; 95% CI, 1.97-19.59; P = .002), and bicuspid aortic valve (sHR, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.04-4.44; P = .038) as independently associated with aortic valve reintervention. For patients aged 50 years or younger, the cumulative incidence of aortic valve reintervention was 16.2% for VSRR (95% CI, 7.0%-28.8%) and 17.8% for bio-Bentall (95% CI, 6.9%-32.8%; P = .363). CONCLUSIONS: VSRR and bio-Bentall show similar excellent survival and freedom from aortic reintervention rates up to 10 years; however, a durable valve solution for young patients with bicuspid aortic valve remains a challenge.

Incidence, Cause, and Outcome of Reinterventions After Aortic Root Replacement.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to comprehensively characterize details of aortic and aortic valve reinterventions after aortic root replacement (ARR). METHODS: Between 2005 and 2019, 882 patients underwent ARR. Indications were aneurysm in 666, aortic valve related in 116, aortic dissection in 64, and infective endocarditis (IE) in 36. Valve-sparing root replacement was performed in 290 patients, whereas a Bio-Bentall procedure was done in 528. Among them, 52 patients (5.9%) required reintervention. The incidence, cause, and time to reintervention and the outcomes after reintervention were investigated. A cause-specific Cox hazard model was performed to identify predictors for reintervention after ARR. RESULTS: The 10-year cumulative incidence of aortic and aortic valve reintervention after ARR was 10.3% (95% confidence interval, 7.3%-14.0%). Age per year decrease was the only independent predictor for reintervention (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-0.99). The causes for 52 reinterventions were aortic valve causes in 29 patients (55.8%), including aortic stenosis/insufficiency, and prosthetic valve dysfunction; IE in 15 (28.9%); aortic-related causes in 7 (13.5%), including pseudoaneurysm, development of aneurysm, and residual dissection; and coronary button pseudoaneurysm in 1 (1.9%). Median time to reintervention was 11.0 months (interquartile range, 2.0-20.5) for IE, 24.0 months (interquartile range, 3.7-46.1) for aortic-related causes, and 77.0 months (interquartile range, 28.4-97.6) for aortic valve-related causes (P = .005). Overall in-hospital mortality after the reinterventions was 7.7% (4/52) with 20.0% for IE (3/15). CONCLUSIONS: Reintervention for IE occurred relatively early after ARR, whereas aortic valve- and aortic-related reinterventions gradually increased over time. In-hospital mortality after the reintervention was low, with the exception of IE.

Extent of aortic replacement and operative outcome in open proximal thoracic aortic aneurysm repair.

Objectives: There are few data to delineate the risk differences among open aortic procedures. We aimed to investigate the influence of the procedural types on the outcomes of proximal thoracic aortic aneurysm repair. Methods: Among 1900 patients who underwent aortic replacement in our institution between 2005 and 2019, 1132 patients with aortic aneurysm who underwent a graft replacement of proximal thoracic aorta were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into 4 groups based on the extent of the aortic replacement: isolated ascending aortic replacement (n = 52); ascending aortic replacement with distal extension with hemiarch, partial arch, or total arch replacement (n = 126); ascending aortic replacement with proximal extension with aortic valve or root replacement (n = 620); and ascending aortic replacement with distal and proximal extension (n = 334). "Eventful recovery," defined as occurrence of any key complications, was used as the primary end point. Odds ratios for inability to achieve uneventful recovery in each procedure were calculated using ascending aortic replacement as a reference. Results: Overall, in-hospital mortality and stroke occurred in 16 patients (1.4%) and 24 patients (2.1%). Eventful recovery was observed in 19.7% of patients: 11.5% in those with ascending aortic replacement, 36.5% in those with partial arch or total arch replacement, 16.6% in those with proximal extension with aortic valve or root replacement, and 20.4% in those with distal and proximal extension (P < .001). With ascending aortic replacement as the reference, a multivariable logistic regression revealed partial arch or total arch replacement (odds ratio, 10.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.8-189.5) was an independent risk factor of inability to achieve uneventful recovery. Conclusions: Open proximal aneurysm repair in the contemporary era resulted in satisfactory in-hospital outcomes. Distal extension was associated with a higher risk for postoperative complications.

Bicuspid-Associated Aortic Root Aneurysm: Mid to Long-Term Outcomes of David V Versus the Bio-Bentall Procedure.

David V valve-sparing root replacement (VSRR) and bio-Bentall (BB) are increasingly performed for aortic root aneurysms associated with a bicuspid aortic valve (BAV). However, durability remains a concern in both procedures. We compared the 10-year outcomes of VSRR vs BB for BAV-associated root aneurysms. A retrospective review identified 134 patients with a BAV-associated root aneurysm who underwent VSRR (n = 65) or BB (n = 69) from 2005 to 2019. Patients with aortic stenosis, endocarditis, previous aortic valve replacement, and emergent cases were excluded. Propensity-score matching was performed, resulting in 2 risk-adjusted groups (n = 40 per group). Median follow-up was 6.21 (1.43-8.28) years. The VSRR cohort was younger (46.0 years vs 56.0 years, P < 0.001) and had a lower incidence of at least moderate aortic insufficiency (AI) (78.5% vs 92.8%, P = 0.02). The incidence of Marfan syndrome, aortic root diameter, and ascending aortic diameter were similar. In-hospital mortality was 1.5% (n = 1) and 1.4% (n = 1) for VSRR and BB, respectively. There was no difference between VSRR and BB in 10-year survival (98.3% [95% confidence interval (CI): 88.6-99.8%] vs 96.2% [95% CI: 85.5-99.0%], P = 0.567) and aortic valve reintervention at 10 years (16.1% [95% CI: 6.3-29.8%] vs 12.9% [95% CI: 3.7-28.0%], P = 0.309). The most common reason for valve reintervention in both groups was AI. Survival and valve reintervention at 10 years were similar in the matched cohort. David V VSRR yields similar mid to long-term outcomes to BB for select patients with a BAV-associated aortic root aneurysm in regards to survival and reintervention rates. Further studies comparing longer term outcomes between root replacement techniques and native valve durability are needed.

Chronic kidney disease stage stratifies short- and long-term outcomes after aortic root replacement.

OBJECTIVES: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is prevalent in patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery, and it negatively impacts procedural outcomes; however, its influence on the outcomes of aortic surgery has not been well studied. This study aims to elucidate the importance of CKD on the outcomes of aortic root replacement (ARR). METHODS: Patients who underwent ARR between 2005 and 2019 were retrospectively reviewed (n = 882). Patients were divided into 3 groups based on the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes criteria: Group 1 [estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥ 60 ml/min/1.73 m2, n = 421); Group 2 (eGFR = 30-59 ml/min/1.73 m2, n = 424); and Group 3 (eGFR < 30 ml/min/1.73 m2, n = 37). To reduce potential confounding, a propensity score matching was also performed between Group 1 and the combined group of Group 2 and Group 3. The primary end point was 10-year survival. Secondary end points were in-hospital mortality and perioperative morbidity. RESULTS: Severe CKD patients presented with more advanced overall chronic and acute illnesses. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a significant correlation between CKD stage and 10-year survival (log-rank P < 0.001). The number of events for Group 1 was 15, Group 2 was 49 and Group 3 was 11 in 10 years. Group 3 had significantly higher in-hospital mortality (13.5% vs 3.5% in Group 2 vs 0.7% in Group 1, P < 0.001) and stroke (8.1% vs 7.1% vs 1.2%, P < 0.001) as well as introduction to new dialysis (27.0% vs 5.4% vs 1.7%, P < 0.001). eGFR was shown to be an independent predictor of mortality (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.96-0.99). Comparison between propensity matched groups showed similar postoperative outcomes, and eGFR was still identified as a predictor of mortality (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Higher stage in CKD negatively impacts the long-term survival in patients who are undergoing ARR.

Assessment of long-term outcomes: aortic valve reimplantation versus aortic valve and root replacement with biological valved conduit in aortic root aneurysm with tricuspid valve.

OBJECTIVES: We compared the long-term outcomes between aortic valve reimplantation [David V (DV)] and aortic valve and root replacement with biological valved conduit [Bentall-De Bono (BD)] for the patients with aortic root aneurysm with tricuspid valve. METHODS: Among 876 patients who underwent aortic root replacement in our institution between 2005 and 2018, 371 patients who underwent DV (n = 199) or BD (n = 172) for aortic root aneurysm with tricuspid valve were retrospectively reviewed. Exclusion criteria included aortic stenosis, infective endocarditis, previous prosthetic aortic valve, bicuspid aortic valve, aortic dissection and mechanical Bentall procedure. Propensity score matching was performed based on the patient characteristics, matching 90 patients in each group. The primary end point was all-cause mortality. Secondary end points were reoperation for any cause and specifically for aortic valve-related cause. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, DV and BD groups each had 1 in-hospital mortality (1.1%). Survival at 10 years was 95.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 85.8-98.5] in DV and 98.6% (95% CI 90.8-99.8) in BD (P = 0.345). The cumulative incidences of reoperation at 10 years in DV versus BD were 3.9% (95% CI 0.7-11.8) vs 18.1% (95% CI 6.9-33.4) for any cause (P = 0.046) and 1.9% (95% CI 0.1-8.8) vs 15.9% (95% CI 5.5-31.4) for aortic valve-related causes (P = 0.032). The reasons for valve-related reoperation were aortic insufficiency (3/5 in DV vs 5/10 in BD), aortic stenosis (0/5 vs 2/10) and infective endocarditis (2/5 vs 3/10). CONCLUSIONS: Both DV and BD procedures for patients with aortic root aneurysm with tricuspid valve resulted in excellent 10-year survival. All-cause and aortic valve-related reoperations were significantly less frequent with valve-sparing root replacement, suggesting an advantage of DV over biological BD.

Feasibility of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Prior Aortic Root Surgery: Insights From Virtual Modeling.

BACKGROUND: Aortic root replacement (ARR) introduces several anatomic complexities relevant to valve-in-valve (VIV)-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) that may (1) increase the risk of coronary obstruction, (2) necessitate transcatheter valve overexpansion to accommodate large annuli, and (3) require alternative vascular access to navigate aortic kinking. Therefore, we aimed to quantify the feasibility of VIV-TAVR in patients who underwent aortic root surgery. METHODS: Postoperative computed tomography scans were reviewed for consecutive patients who underwent ARR between 2005 and 2019 to obtain measurements relevant for VIV-TAVR planning. Virtual transcatheter valve to coronary ostia distance was measured to assess the risk of coronary obstruction. Root morphologies were classified into 1 of 4 groups based on aortic graft type, aortic diameter at the sinotubular junction, sinus height, estimated transcatheter heart valve height, and diameter. VIV-TAVR was projected to be complex in patients with an aortic kink, extremely large annulus, or heightened risk of coronary obstruction. RESULTS: Among 848 patients who underwent ARR during the 15-year study period, qualifying contrast-enhanced scans post-ARR were performed in 81 patients. Complex VIV-TAVR was anticipated in 50.6% of subjects. Patients with abnormal root anatomy experienced increased odds of complex VIV-TAVR relative to patients with normal root physiology (ie, sinotubular junction diameter>transcatheter heart valve diameter, sinus height>transcatheter heart valve height) or those who received straight tube grafts (odds ratio, 4.53 [95% CI, 1.02-20.1], P=0.046). The odds of complex VIV-TAVR were also higher among patients who underwent aortic valve replacement-ARR with a stentless bioprosthesis (stentless versus stented, odds ratio, 4.63 [95% CI, 1.40-15.3], P=0.012; stentless versus valve-sparing ARR, odds ratio, 3.78 [95% CI, 1.14-12.5], P=0.029). CONCLUSIONS: ARR patients with atypical root morphologies or those who underwent valve replacement with stentless bioprostheses may be at high risk for complex VIV-TAVR. Prospective evaluation is required to assess the impact of these conclusions on procedural feasibility.

In Situ Composition of Valved Conduit for Complex Reoperative Aortic Root Replacement.

We describe a novel technique, in situ composition of a valved conduit, for complex reoperative aortic root replacement. The absence of a rigid stented aortic valve prosthesis facilitates left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) reconstruction and coronary reimplantation. First, a Dacron graft, inverted and inserted into the LVOT, is sewn to the LVOT, followed by coronary button reimplantation and then prosthetic valve implantation. For cases that require LVOT reconstruction, the graft below the prosthetic valve serves as a circumferential patch. Our technique requires only surgical materials that are readily available without the need for a specialized skillset.

Sex-related difference in outcomes after aortic root replacement.

PURPOSE: Poorer short-term outcomes have been described for females after cardiovascular surgery. We examined the influence of sex on the outcomes after aortic root replacement (ARR). METHODS: Medical records of 848 patients (females, n = 159/848, 19%) who underwent ARR at our center from 2005 to 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Sex differences of the following outcomes were analyzed: the primary end point (in-hospital mortality or stro111ke), secondary end point (new requirement for permanent pacemaker), and long-term survival (median follow-up 21.4 months [interquartile range,1.3-60.0]). RESULTS: Females were significantly older (61.3 vs 58.7 [male]) with higher rates of pre-existing cerebrovascular disease (14% [22/159] vs 7% [52/689]) and previous valve intervention (20% [32/159] vs 13% [89/689]) but less myocardial infarction [1%(1/159) vs 7%(48/689)]. The surgical indication was different (aneurysm 75% [120/159] vs 87% [602/689], dissection 13% [21/159] vs 6% [41/689]; P < .01]). Females had larger average aneurysm size after controlling for body size (P ≤ .001). There was no sex difference in in-hospital mortality (3% [5/159] vs 2% [16/689]) or stroke (4% [7/159] vs 4% [29/689]). Multivariable logistic regression indicated that female sex was not an independent predictor of combined in-hospital stroke or death (odds ratio [OR], 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-1.25), confirmed by propensity score analysis. There was no difference in long-term survival (5-year survival, 90.96% vs 93.03%; P = .44). Females had higher incidence of permanent pacemaker requirement [11% (18/159) vs 6% (39/689), P = .03] and female sex was an independent predictor of permanent pacemaker requirement (OR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.085-3.724; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: While female patients have different baseline characteristics and indication for ARR, they are not exposed to an increased risk of in-hospital mortality or stroke. However, females experience increased incidence of permanent pacemaker requirement.

Probability of Uneventful Recovery After Elective Aortic Root Replacement for Aortic Aneurysm.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the chance of patients not experiencing complications (uneventful recovery) after aortic root replacement for aortic aneurysm. The aim of this study was to investigate the probability of uneventful recovery, identify its predictors, and address the association between the uneventful recovery and long-term survival. METHODS: Patients with aortic aneurysm who underwent elective aortic root replacement between 2005 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed (N = 676). Uneventful recovery was defined as avoidance of all of the following complications during the index hospital stay (selected based on Cox proportional hazards regression for long-term survival): mortality, any stroke, reexploration for bleeding, respiratory failure, acute renal failure, deep sternal infection, and postcardiotomy shock. Permanent pacemaker implantation was included because of its clinical perspectives. Patients were divided into 4 different age groups (group <60 years of age, n = 299; group 60-69 years of age, n = 209; group 70-79 years of age, n = 125; group ≥80 years of age, n = 43), according to a restricted cubic spline analysis on in-hospital mortality and postoperative stroke. RESULTS: Uneventful recovery was 78.1%. The probability of uneventful recovery decreased in a linear fashion as the age increases (82.6% in the group <60 years of age, 79.0% in the group 60-69 years of age, 70.4% in the group 70-79 years of age, 65.1% in the group ≥80 years of age; P = .007). A multivariable logistic regression showed age, left ventricular ejection fraction, previous cardiac surgery, and peripheral artery disease were independent predictors of uneventful recovery. Uneventful recovery resulted in significantly better 5-year survival (log-rank P = .039). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides novel information regarding the probability of uneventful recovery while confirming low in-hospital mortality and stroke rates after elective aortic root replacement for aortic aneurysm. Importantly, uneventful recovery ensures excellent long-term survival.

Alignment of Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Neo-Commissures (ALIGN TAVR): Impact on Final Valve Orientation and Coronary Artery Overlap.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of initial deployment orientation of SAPIEN 3, Evolut, and ACURATE-neo transcatheter heart valves on their final orientation and neocommissural overlap with coronary arteries. BACKGROUND: Coronary artery access and redo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) following initial TAVR may be influenced by transcatheter heart valve orientation. In this study the impact of transcatheter heart valve deployment orientation on commissural alignment was evaluated. METHODS: Pre-TAVR computed tomography and procedural fluoroscopy were analyzed in 828 patients who underwent TAVR (483 SAPIEN 3, 245 Evolut, and 100 ACURATE-neo valves) from March 2016 to September 2019 at 5 centers. Coplanar fluoroscopic views were coregistered to pre-TAVR computed tomography to determine commissural alignment. Severe overlap between neocommissural posts and coronary arteries was defined as 0° to 20° apart. The SAPIEN 3 had 1 commissural post crimped at 3, 6, 9, and 12 o'clock. The Evolut "Hat" marker and ACURATE-neo commissural post at deployment were classified as center back (CB), inner curve (IC), outer curve (OC), or center front (CF) and matched with final orientation. RESULTS: Initial SAPIEN 3 crimped orientation had no impact on commissural alignment. Evolut "Hat" at OC or CF at initial deployment had less severe overlap than IC or CB (p < 0.001) against the left main (15.7% vs. 66.0%) and right coronary (7.1% vs. 51.1%) arteries. Tracking Evolut "Hat" at OC of the descending aorta (n = 107) improved OC at deployment from 70.2% to 91.6% (p = 0.002) and reduced coronary artery overlap by 36% to 60% (p < 0.05). ACURATE-neo commissural post at CB or IC during deployment had less coronary artery overlap compared to CF or OC (p < 0.001), with intentional alignment successful in 5 of 7 cases. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first systematic evaluation of commissural alignment in TAVR. More than 30% to 50% of cases had overlap with 1 or both coronary arteries. Initial SAPIEN 3 orientation had no impact on alignment, but specific initial orientations of Evolut and ACURATE improved alignment. Optimizing valve alignment to avoid coronary artery overlap will be important in coronary artery access and redo TAVR.

Descending aortic banding for re-rupture of retrograde aortic dissection after emergency thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

Conversion to open repair after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for acute type B aortic dissection is rare, but inevitable. We present a case of an 86-year-old man with ruptured type B aortic dissection after TEVAR. He received a successful stent-graft implantation of the descending aorta without any type of endoleak. After the patient was transferred to the intensive care unit, he went into a shock state. Contrast-enhanced CT revealed a re-rupture of acute retrograde type B aortic dissection. The false lumen was patent and perforated to the left thorax. Left thoracotomy and descending aortic banding was performed. Descending aorta was encircled with a woven Dacron graft at the distal part of the rupture site to compress the patent false lumen. The bleeding was stopped, and the follow-up CT showed false lumen thrombosis. Descending aortic banding is one of the quick and effective open conversion techniques.

Double mattress suture lines for valve-sparing aortic root replacement.

Valve sparing aortic root replacement remains a complex procedure despite various improvements that have been made to this operation. Specifically, a hemostatic proximal anastomosis is one of the most important factors for successful completion of the operation without complication. Here we describe a double mattress suture line technique, which facilitates a secure and hemostatic proximal suture line.