Outcome of thrombus aspiration in STEMI patients: a propensity score-adjusted study.

The use of thrombus aspiration (TA) prior to primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) has undergone a radical change in intervention guidelines. The clinical implications, however, are still under scrutiny. This study investigated the clinical effects and outcome of TA before PPCI in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Overall 1027 patients with STEMI were analyzed in this retrospective, propensity score-adjusted, multicenter study. The primary endpoints were in-hospital and long-term mortality. There were 418 patients in the TA group and 609 in the conventional PPCI group. The in-hospital mortality rate was significantly higher in the TA group (8.7 vs. 5.0%; P = 0.03). During long-term follow-up [median follow-up duration 689 days (IQR 405-959)] the mortality rates were similar (TA 14.3%, conventional PPCI 15.0%; P = 0.85). Survival analysis for the complete observation period revealed no significant benefit of TA [hazard ratio (HR) 1.12; 97.5% CI 0.90-0.71; P = 0.63]. There were also no significant differences between the groups in the following secondary endpoints: composite of cardiovascular death and non-fatal reinfarction at discharge (P = 0.39), post-PPCI thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow-grade-3 (P = 0.14), left ventricular ejection fraction (P = 0.47), and non-fatal reinfarction during follow-up (P = 0.17). Rehospitalization rate (1.82 vs. 10.3%; P < 0.0001) and Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) grading (P = 0.02) during follow-up were significantly lower in the TA group. In our cohort the in-hospital mortality rate was significantly higher for TA patients, but during long-term follow-up the mortality rates did not differ. The incidence of rehospitalization and CCS grading were lower in the TA-treated patients.

Long-Term Outcome of Aortic Root Remodeling for Patients With and Without Acute Aortic Dissection.

BACKGROUND: Valve-preserving aortic surgery is increasingly used in acute aortic dissection type A (AADA). The object of this study was to compare the long-term results of aortic root remodeling (remodeling) for patients with and without AADA.Methods and Results:Between October 1995 and December 2013, 776 patients underwent valve-preserving root replacement, of whom 59 patients with AADA (<2 weeks from onset, 56±16 years, 48 male) underwent remodeling (the remodeling-group); 7 patients had bicuspid anatomy (12%), 3 had Marfan syndrome (5%), and 1 had undergone previous cardiac surgery (2%). For this analysis the control group of patients who underwent remodeling for stable aneurysm (n=59) was generated using a propensity score matching. The long-term outcomes regarding survival and reoperation on the aortic valve were compared between the 2 groups. Pre- and intraoperative patients' characteristics were comparable between groups. Early death was 7% in the AADA group and 3% in the control group (P=0.40). Actuarial survival at 10 years of the AADA group (72±6%) was insignificantly lower than that of the control group (83±5%) (P=0.16). Freedom from reoperation at 10 years was similar (AADA group: 98±2%, control group: 97±3%, P=0.99). Multivariable Cox's proportional hazards model could not identify an independent predictor for late reoperation but advanced age for late death. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term stability of remodeling was comparable between patients with and without AADA.

Aortic root remodeling leads to good valve stability in acute aortic dissection and preexistent root dilatation.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the long-term results of aortic root remodeling in the setting of acute aortic dissection type A (AADA). METHODS: Between October 1995 and May 2013, a total of 215 patients were treated surgically for AADA. Of these, 59 patients with AADA (<2 weeks from onset, age 56 ± 16 years, 53 males) with a root diameter of ≥43 to 45 mm (depending on patient size) underwent aortic root remodeling and were analyzed further. Reimplantation was performed in 7 patients; root replacement with a mechanical composite graft, in 16 patients; root replacement with a stentless biological prosthesis, in 10 patients; and tubular ascending aortic replacement, in 133 patients. RESULTS: Reexploration for bleeding was performed in 10 patients (17%; 8% since 2007). Early mortality was 6.8%; no patient died after 2002. Actuarial survival at 10 years was 72% ± 6%. One patient underwent aortic valve replacement for recurrent cusp prolapse at 1 year after surgery. In this operation, cusp configuration was assessed by eyeballing until 2003. The rate of freedom from proximal reoperation at 10 years was 98% ± 2%. Using a Cox proportional hazards model, no independent predictors for survival and reoperation after remodeling were found. Advanced age and concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting were identified as independent predictors for survival in all 215 patients with AADA. CONCLUSIONS: Root remodeling allows for stable valve preservation in patients with AADA and preexistent root dilatation.