Results of Reoperation on the Aortic Root and the Ascending Aorta

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.

Large aortic pseudoaneurysm after Bentall procedure in a patient with Marfan's syndrome

An 11-year-old male with Marfan's syndrome and aortic root dilatation underwent an uneventful Bentall procedure to replace his aortic root and valve. Five months later, surveillance echocardiogram revealed a slowly enlarging pseudoaneurysm arising from the ascending aorta. This finding was subsequently confirmed by computed tomographic angiogram. The patient had successful open surgical repair and paraaortic hematoma evacuation.

Tips and tricks in redo aortic surgery

Redo aortic surgery is challenging, and the operative risk is higher than that in primary aortic surgery. Preoperative imaging is a crucial guide for a safe re-entry. Scrutinized preparing in cannulation and organ protection strategies have affected surgical outcomes. With comprehensive planning and meticulously executed surgery, mortality and morbidity can be acceptable.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12055-021-01322-x.

Clinical analysis of redo aortic root replacement after cardiac surgery: a retrospective study

Objectives

To explore the etiology, previous cardiac procedure methods and outcomes of redo aortic root replacement after cardiac surgery.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of 41 patients who underwent aortic root replacement surgery in our hospital from February 2010 to February 2020 who underwent at least one cardiac surgery in the past, including 27 males and 14 females, with an average age of 49.5 ± 10.2 years old. Indications for reoperation include: aortic sinus dilation and ascending aortic aneurysm in 20 cases (48.8%), recurrent aortic dissection in 7 cases (17.1%), pseudoaneurysm of aortic root in 4 cases (9.8%), prosthetic valve endocarditis in 5 cases (12.2%) and paravalvular leakage in 5 cases (12.2%). According to whether the previous procedure involved aortic root surgery, they were divided into 2 groups, namely aortic root surgery-involved (ARS) group and non-aortic root surgery-involved (NRS) group. After the patients were discharged from hospitals, follow-ups were carried out through outpatient clinic or telephone for 5 years. Kaplan-Meier was used for survival analysis.

Results

All patients underwent Bentall procedure with a median sternum incision. Six patients (14.6%) died during the postoperative hospitalization and 3 patients (8.6%) died during the follow-up. The 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival in ARS group were 92.6, 92.6, and 92.6%, respectively; the 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival in NRS group were 100, 85.7, and 85.7%, respectively. There was no statistical difference between the two groups in the cause of redo aortic root replacement, procedure time, postoperative complications, postoperative hospital stay, hospital mortality, and 5-year cumulative survival (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Redo aortic root replacement is difficult and high risk. Bentall procedure is still a reliable surgical option for redo aortic root replacement, with good short- and mid-term results. The prognosis of redo aortic root replacement is not necessarily related to the etiology of patient’s surgery and the methods of previous cardiac procedure.

Re-Operative Aortic Arch Surgery in a Contemporary Series

Re-operative aortic arch operations (REDO) following previous cardiac surgery are challenging procedures associated with significant morbidity and mortality. We investigated post-operative outcomes for patients undergoing REDO and identified risk-factors for mortality in a contemporary series. From 1/2005-6/2018, 365 consecutive patients at an academic center underwent REDO: 257 HEMIARCH and 108 COMPLETE arch (45 stage I elephant trunk, 63 total arch) replacements. Outcomes included mortality and major adverse events. Long-term survival was determined with Kaplan-Meier analysis, and risk-factors for mortality were assessed with Cox proportional hazards regression. Operative mortality for the entire cohort was 6.8%, and rates of stroke, cardiac arrest, and renal failure were 6.0%, 7.4%, and 10.4%. Compared to HEMIARCH, COMPLETE patients had an increased incidence of renal failure requiring dialysis (15.7% vs 8.2%, p = 0.031) and re-exploration for bleeding or delayed chest closure (19.4% vs. 11.7%, p = 0.051). Although operative mortality was similar in both cohorts, long-term follow-up mortality (38.0% vs 26.8%, p = 0.047) was higher among COMPLETE vs. HEMIARCH. Predictors of overall mortality among all-comers undergoing REDO included older age, low body surface area, endocarditis, ejection fraction <30%, emergent status of operation, extended cardiopulmonary bypass duration, intra-aortic balloon pump use, and a more extensive arch operation. Previous aortic surgery was not a risk-factor for mortality. Among all-comers undergoing REDO, survival was 81.4% at 1 year, 66.7% at 5 years, and 56.4% at 10 years of follow-up. While early postoperative outcomes are similar among HEMIARCH and COMPLETE, a more extensive arch-replacement is an independent risk-factor for overall mortality in REDO. Using appropriate clinical indications in the current era, REDO remains a viable option for selected patients.

Does adding an aortic root replacement or sinus repair during arch repair increase postoperative mortality? Evidence from the Canadian Thoracic Aortic Collaborative

 

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to examine the effect of the addition of an aortic root replacement or sinus repair on mortality and morbidity during aortic arch repair.

METHODS

A total of 2472 patients underwent proximal or total aortic arch repair with hypothermic circulatory arrest between 2002 and 2018 at 12 centres. Multivariable logistic regressions (MV) and propensity score (PS) with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 1099 (44.5%) patients had additional aortic root replacement (n = 934) or sinus repair (n = 165). Those with aortic root interventions were younger (61 ± 13 vs 64 ± 13 years, P < 0.001) and had less females (23% vs 35%, P < 0.001), less dissection (31% vs 36%, P = 0.004), less urgent cases (35% vs 39%, P = 0.047), more connective tissue disease (7% vs 3%, P < 0.001) and less total arch replacements (14% vs 22%, P < 0.001). On adjusted analyses, the addition of aortic root procedure was associated with increased mortality [MV: odds ratio (OR) 1.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03-1.92; PS-IPTW: risk increased by 3.7%, 95% CI 1.2-6.3%, P = 0.004]. Reoperation for bleeding was also increased with the addition of aortic root intervention (MV: OR 1.48, 95% 1.10-1.99; PS-IPTW: risk increased by 3.2%, 95% CI 0.8-5.6%, P = 0.009). The risks of stroke and dialysis-dependent renal failure were similar. When looking only at non-elective cases, the increased risk of mortality was more pronounced (MV: OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.11-2.32, P = 0.013; PS-IPTW: risk increased by 6.8%, 95 CI 1.7-11.8%, P = 0.008, and a number need to harm of 15 patients to cause 1 additional death).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of aortic root replacement or sinus repair during proximal or total aortic arch repair seems to increase postoperative mortality only in non-elective cases.

Outcome of reoperative aortic root or ascending aorta replacement after prior aortic valve replacement

Background

There are limited data regarding the clinical outcomes of reoperative aortic root or ascending aorta replacement after prior aortic valve replacement (AVR). We aimed to analyze outcomes of reoperative aortic root or ascending aorta replacement after prior AVR.

Methods

Eighty patients with prior AVR underwent reoperative aortic root or ascending aorta replacement in our hospital. The indications were root or ascending aortic aneurysm in 36 patients, root or ascending aortic dissection in 37, root false aneurysm in 2, prosthesis valve endocarditis (PVE) with root abscess in 2, Behçet’s disease (BD) with root destruction in 3 patients. An elective surgery was performed in 63 patients and an emergent surgery in 17. The survival and freedom from aortic events during the follow-up were evaluated with the Kaplan-Meier survival curve and the log-rank test.

Results

The operative techniques included ascending aorta replacement in 14 patients, ascending aorta replacement with AVR in 3, prosthesis-sparing root replacement (PSRR) in 35, Bentall procedure in 24, and Cabrol procedure in 4 patients. Operative mortality was 1.3% (1/80). A composite of adverse events occurred in 5 patients, including 1 operative death, 2 stroke and 3 renal failure necessitating hemodialysis. The mean follow-up was 35.5±22.1 months. Five late deaths occurred. The Kaplan-Meier survival at 1 year, 3 years and 6 years were 97.5%, 91.1% and 84.1%, respectively. Aortic events developed in 3 patients. The freedom from aortic events at 1-year, 3-year, and 6-year were 100%, 96.3% and 88.9%, respectively. There were no differences in survival and freedom from aortic events between the elective group and the emergent group.

Conclusions

Reoperative aortic root or ascending aorta replacement after prior AVR could be performed to treat the root or ascending pathologies after AVR, with satisfactory early and midterm outcomes.

Valve-sparing aortic root replacement after type A aortic dissection repairs

OBJECTIVE

Aortic root reoperation after aortic dissection repair sometimes requires aortic root replacement. A valve-preserving technique should be applied when the aortic cusp is normal. Valve-sparing aortic root reconstruction using the reimplantation technique resolves aortic valve regurgitation, root dilatation, and pseudoaneurysm in the proximal anastomosis. Our experience in aortic root reoperation is presented.

METHODS

From January 2000 to March 2019, 26 patients underwent reoperative valve-sparing aortic root reconstruction using the reimplantation technique. The time from the initial operation to reoperation was 69.3 ± 51.6 months. Aortic root reoperation was required for a fragile wall at the previous proximal anastomosis or aortic root dilatation. We aimed to stabilize the aortic root without valve regurgitation. The native aortic cusp was aggressively preserved when nearly normal. Indications included root dilatation (n = 13), pseudoaneurysm of the previous proximal anastomosis (n = 11), and aortic valve regurgitation (n = 4).

RESULTS

There was no early postoperative mortality. Follow-up was 49 ± 47 months (range 4-161 months). The 3, 5, and 10-year survival was 88.9% ± 7.4%, 88.9% ± 7.4%, and 77.8% ± 12.2%, respectively. Freedom from recurrence of a greater than moderate degree of aortic valve regurgitation at 3, 5, and 10 years was 86.5% ± 8.9%, 86.5% ± 8.9%, and 86.5% ± 8.9%, respectively. One patient underwent aortic valve replacement for recurrent aortic valve regurgitation 15 months after the valve-sparing reoperation.

CONCLUSIONS

Midterm outcomes of reoperative valve-sparing aortic root reconstruction using the reimplantation technique and postoperative aortic valve performance were satisfactory.

Reimplantation versus remodeling in valve-sparing surgery for aortic root aneurysms: a meta-analysis

Background

Valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSARR), which includes reimplantation and remodeling techniques, has been developed as an important treatment for aortic root aneurysms. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of reimplantation versus remodeling techniques in valve-sparing surgery for aortic root aneurysms.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed by searching PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library until November 2019. Fourteen retrospective cohort studies comparing reimplantation with remodeling techniques for aortic root aneurysms were included and contained at least one of the following outcomes: early mortality, late mortality, aortic valve-related reoperation, and postoperative moderate to severe aortic regurgitation (AR).

Results

The outcomes of 1,672 patients (1,011 underwent reimplantation surgery, and 661 underwent remodeling) were analyzed. Compared with remodeling, the reimplantation technique was associated with a significantly lower risk of late mortality (RR =0.34; 95% CI, 0.17–0.71; P=0.004; I²=37%) and reoperation (RR =0.31; 95% CI, 0.12–0.76; P=0.01; I²=55%). There was no significant difference in early mortality (RR =0.69; 95% CI, 0.31–1.53; P=0.36; I²=0%), postoperative moderate to severe AR (RR =0.64; 95% CI, 0.31–1.32; P=0.22; I²=36%) or postoperative stroke (RR =1.26; 95% CI, 0.58–2.75; P=0.56; I²=0%) between the two groups. No evidence of publication bias was detected.

Conclusions

The current meta-analysis indicate that patients who undergo reimplantation procedures have a significantly lower risk of late mortality and reoperation than those who undergo remodeling procedures. Early mortality, postoperative moderate to severe AR and stroke were comparable between the two techniques.

Surgical Complexity and Outcome of Patients Undergoing Re-do Aortic Valve Surgery

Objectives

Re-do aortic valve surgery carries a higher mortality and morbidity compared with first time aortic valve replacement (AVR) and often requires concomitant complex procedures. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an option for selective patients. The aim of this study is to present our experience with re-do aortic valve procedures and give an insight into the characteristics of these patients and their outcomes.

Methods

Retrospective review of 80 consecutive re-do aortic valve procedures.

Results

Mean patients’ age was 51.80±18.73 years. Aortic regurgitation (AR) was present in 51 (65.4%) patients and aortic stenosis (AS) in 38 (48.7%). Indications for reoperation were: infective endocarditis (IE) (23.8%), bioprosthetic degeneration (12.5%), mechanical valve dysfunction (5%), paravalvular leak (6.2%), patient–prosthesis mismatch (3.8%), native valve disease (25%), aortic aneurysm, pseudoaneurysm and dissection (35%), aortic root/homograft degeneration (27.5%). Forty-one (51.2%) patients underwent re-do AVR, 39 (48.8%) re-do complex aortic valve surgery (28 root, 23 ascending aorta and 6 hemiarch procedures) and 37.5% concomitant procedures. A bioprosthesis was implanted in 43.8%, a mechanical valve in 37.5%, a composite graft in 2.5%, a Biovalsalva graft in 6.2% and a homograft in 10% of patients. In-hospital mortality was 3.8% and incidence of major complications was low.

Conclusions

A significant proportion of patients were young (61%<60 y), required complex aortic procedures (49%) or presented with contraindications for TAVR (mechanical valve, AR, IE, proximal aortic disease, need for concomitant surgery). Re-do aortic surgery remains the only treatment for such challenging cases and can be performed with acceptable mortality and morbidity in a specialised aortic centre.

Outcomes After Left Ventricular Outflow Tract Reconstruction With a Tube Graft for Annular Erosion

BACKGROUND

Aortic annular erosion is a serious complication of aortic valve endocarditis or previous aortic valve replacement. This study examined the outcomes of a technique for left ventricular outflow tract reconstruction using a polyester tube graft, followed by translocation of the aortic valve and coronary arteries.

METHODS

A total of 23 patients with extensive annular erosion resulting from endocarditis or previous aortic valve replacement with or without pseudoaneurysm formation, or occurring after excision of the native valve, underwent suture of a polyester tube graft in the left ventricular outflow tract below the annulus, replacement of the aortic valve and proximal ascending aorta with a composite graft, and reimplantation of the coronary arteries with the use of interposition polyester grafts. The mean age of the patients was 50 years, and 57% were men.

RESULTS

There were no hospital deaths. The mean duration of follow-up was 6.5 years and extended to 16 years. Actuarial survival at 1, 5, and 10 years was 86.7%, 82.2%, and 62.6%, respectively. Two patients required reoperation for a graft-graft pseudoaneurysm and for degeneration of a porcine bioprosthesis. Echocardiograms obtained at a mean of 75 months postoperatively in 15 of the 23 patients demonstrated normal left ventricular outflow tract dimensions and velocities and a mean effective valve orifice area of 1.07 cm²/m². All coronary artery grafts were patent on angiography a mean of 40 months postoperatively in 13 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Extended experience with this technique confirms its safety and effectiveness for patients with extensive destruction of the aortic annulus. It represents a suitable alternative to other currently used techniques.

Imaging Surveillance After Proximal Aortic Operations: Is it Necessary?

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines for imaging surveillance after proximal aortic repair are not evidence based. This study sought to characterize the incidence and causes of reintervention after proximal aortic operations to provide data to guide the frequency and duration of postoperative surveillance.

METHODS

Data on all patients undergoing proximal aortic operations (ascending, with or without root, with or without aortic valve replacement, or with or without arch) during a 9-year period (n = 869) at a single institution were prospectively collected. Patients who required reintervention on the proximal or distal aorta were identified and causes for reintervention determined. Planned two-stage repairs and index procedures done at other hospitals were excluded. The primary end point was the time to the first reintervention, and competing-risk Cox regression was used to model reintervention risk.

RESULTS

Reinterventions occurred in 4.3% of patients (n = 37), with 48.6% (n = 18) involving the proximal aorta and 51.4% (n = 19) the distal. Median time to reintervention was 2.8 years (interquartile range, 1.5 to 3.6 years). For index aneurysm cases, reintervention for aneurysm of the descending/thoracoabdominal aorta and root were most common. Of the 6 root aneurysms/pseudoaneurysms, 5 (83%) were due to degeneration of a stentless porcine aortic root. For index type A dissections, reintervention for aneurysm of the descending/thoracoabdominal aorta and arch were most common. The mean duration of follow up was 4.2 ± 2.5 years. The 9-year actuarial freedom from reintervention was 92.9%. Cox regression showed index type A dissection was a significant predictor of time to aortic reintervention (hazard ratio, 2.01; 95% confidence interval, 1.04 to 3.9; p = 0.038).

CONCLUSIONS

Reinterventions after proximal aortic operations are uncommon; most occur within 3 years of the index operation and involve the proximal and distal aorta nearly equally. Patients with type A dissection or stentless porcine roots require aggressive surveillance, whereas a more liberal approach is suitable for patients without such risk factors. This strategy may reduce the lifetime radiation burden and health care costs.

Surgical management and outcomes of type A dissection-the Mayo Clinic experience

BACKGROUND

Type A aortic dissection (TAAD) is a complex cardiovascular disease that is associated with high perioperative morbidity and mortality. The most effective approach is still being debated-such as the best cannulation technique, and conservative versus extensive initial surgery. We reviewed our experience over the last 20 years and examined for variables that correlated with observed outcomes.

METHODS

All patients who underwent TAAD repair were reviewed. Chi-Square tests, Fisher Exact tests and Wilcoxon tests were performed where appropriate. Survival and freedom from reoperations were analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier actuarial method.

RESULTS

Acute TAAD was associated with a higher incidence of permanent stroke (P=0.010), renal failure (P=0.025), prolonged mechanical ventilator support (P=0.004), higher operative mortality (P=0.039) and higher 30-day mortality (P=0.003) compared to chronic TAAD. There was a trend towards higher risk for transient neurologic events among patients who were reoperated on (P=0.057). Extensive proximal repair led to longer perfusion and cross clamp times (P<0.001) and the need for temporary mechanical support post-operatively (P=0.011). More patients that had extensive distal repair underwent circulatory arrest (P=0.009) with no significant differences in the incidence of peri-operative complications, early, middle and long-term survival compared to the conservative management group. Overall survival in our series was 66.73% and 46.30% at 5 and 10 years respectively (median survival time: 9.38 years). There was a significant improvement in operative mortality (P=0.002) and 30-day mortality (P=0.033) in the second decade of our study.

DISCUSSION

TAAD is a complex disease with several options for its surgical management. Each technique has its own advantages and complications and surgical management should be individualized depending on the clinical presentation. We propose our present approach to maximize benefits in both the short and long term.

Long Term Outcomes Following Freestyle Stentless Aortic Bioprosthesis Implantation: An Australian Experience

BACKGROUND

The Freestyle stentless bioprosthesis (FSB) has been demonstrated to be a durable prosthesis in the aortic position. We present data following Freestyle implantation for up to 10 years post-operatively and compare this with previously published results.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis of 237 patients following FSB implantation occurred at five Australian hospitals. Follow-up data included clinical and echocardiographic outcomes.

RESULTS

The cohort was 81.4% male with age 63.2±13.0 years and was followed for a mean of 2.4±2.3 years (range 0-10.9 years, total 569 patient-years). The FSB was implanted as a full aortic root replacement in 87.8% patients. The 30-day all cause mortality was 4.2% (2.0% for elective surgery). Cumulative survival at one, five and 10 years was 91.7±1.9%, 82.8±3.8% and 56.5±10.5%, respectively. Freedom from re-intervention at one, five and 10 years was 99.5±0.5%, 91.6±3.7% and 72.3±10.5%, respectively. At latest echocardiographic review (mean 2.3±2.1 years post-operatively), 92.6% had trivial or no aortic regurgitation. Predictors of post-operative mortality included active endocarditis, acute aortic dissection and peripheral vascular disease.

CONCLUSIONS

We report acceptable short and long term outcomes following FSB implantation in a cohort of comparatively younger patients with thoracic aortic disease. The durability of this bioprosthesis in the younger population remains to be confirmed.

The addition of hemiarch replacement to aortic root surgery does not affect safety

OBJECTIVES

A hemiarch reconstruction, using deep hypothermic circulatory arrest, is the conventional approach for proximal aortic arch reconstruction, but it carries risks of neurologic events and coagulopathy. The addition of a hemiarch reconstruction to an aortic root replacement may prevent future aortic arch pathology. Outcomes of this approach at a tertiary care institution were examined to determine whether the addition of a hemiarch reconstruction to an aortic root replacement conferred any additional risk.

METHODS

A total of 384 patients underwent an aortic root replacement between April 2004 and June 2012. Of them, 177 (46%) had hemiarch replacement. Propensity score matching yielded 133 pairs of patients receiving hemiarch and non-hemiarch.

RESULTS

Sinus segment diameter was similar between groups; ascending aortic diameter was greater in the hemiarch group (median 50 vs 44 mm; P < .001). The hemiarch group had longer perfusion (median 186 vs 120.5 minutes; P < .001) and crossclamp times (median 140 vs 104 minutes; P < .001); median circulatory arrest was 13 minutes. There was no difference, hemiarch versus no hemiarch, in 30-day mortality (3.0% vs 1.5%; P = .41), stroke (2.3% vs 4.5%; P = .31), reoperation for bleeding (11% vs 10%; P = .84), or overall survival (5-year 88.0% [95% confidence interval, 81.9-94.0] vs 91.4% [95% confidence interval, 85.8-96.9], P = .24).

CONCLUSIONS

In this series, aortic root replacement ± hemiarch reconstruction had low mortality. Addition of hemiarch replacement extended perfusion times but not at the expense of safety. Hemiarch reconstruction should be performed when the aortic root aneurysm extends into the distal ascending aorta.

Endovascular repair of mitroaortic intervalvular fibrosa aneurysm after bentall surgery

We report the first case of a successful transapical transcatheter treatment of a giant pseudoaneurysm originating from a rupture of the mitroaortic fibrosa that occurred 3 months after a Bentall procedure in a 81-year-old male patient. Because of the age of the patient and the location of the leak at the mitroaortic fibrosa, the risk of a conventional ascending aorta reoperation was considered too high, and a transcatheter approach was chosen. A transapical puncture was performed with a left minithoracotomy followed by a catheterization of the pseudoaneurysm neck and an 8-mm Amplatzer (St. Jude Medical, Saint Paul, MN, USA) device was delivered, resulting in a successful complete endovascular exclusion of the pseudo-aneurysmal sac.

Long-term results after proximal thoracic aortic redo surgery

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate early and mid-term results in patients undergoing proximal thoracic aortic redo surgery.

METHODS

We analyzed 60 patients (median age 60 years, median logistic EuroSCORE 40) who underwent proximal thoracic aortic redo surgery between January 2005 and April 2012. Outcome and risk factors were analyzed.

RESULTS

In hospital mortality was 13%, perioperative neurologic injury was 7%. Fifty percent of patients underwent redo surgery in an urgent or emergency setting. In 65%, partial or total arch replacement with or without conventional or frozen elephant trunk extension was performed. The preoperative logistic EuroSCORE I confirmed to be a reliable predictor of adverse outcome- (ROC 0.786, 95%CI 0.64-0.93) as did the new EuroSCORE II model: ROC 0.882 95%CI 0.78-0.98. Extensive individual logistic EuroSCORE I levels more than 67 showed an OR of 7.01, 95%CI 1.43-34.27. A EuroSCORE II larger than 28 showed an OR of 4.44 (95%CI 1.4-14.06). Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified a critical preoperative state (OR 7.96, 95%CI 1.51-38.79) but not advanced age (OR 2.46, 95%CI 0.48-12.66) as the strongest independent predictor of in-hospital mortality. Median follow-up was 23 months (1-52 months). One year and five year actuarial survival rates were 83% and 69% respectively. Freedom from reoperation during follow-up was 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a substantial early attrition rate in patients presenting with a critical preoperative state, proximal thoracic aortic redo surgery provides excellent early and mid-term results. Higher EuroSCORE I and II levels and a critical preoperative state but not advanced age are independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. As a consequence, age alone should no longer be regarded as a contraindication for surgical treatment in this particular group of patients.

Improved brain and myocardial protection during complex aortic reinterventions

In redo aortic surgery, an important issue of brain and myocardial protection is raised in patients presenting with large aneurysm (or pseudoaneurysm) adherent to the sternum and severe aortic valve regurgitation. We present our technique involving antegrade brain perfusion before resternotomy and left ventricle venting through the apex using a small anterolateral left thoracotomy.

Results of one-hundred and seventy patients after elective Bentall operation

The aim of this study was to evaluate the short and long-term operative results of patients who underwent a Bentall procedure in a 12-year period. We retrospectively analyzed the data of 170 patients who underwent an elective Bentall procedure between January 1998 and July 2010. All pre- and perioperative variable were entered into a multivariate regression model to identify significant predictors of early and late mortality. The early mortality rate was 11.2% (19/170 patients). Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified prior cardiac operation and cardiopulmonary bypass time as independent risk factors for early mortality, with odds ratios of 5.75 (95% confidence interval: 1.850–17.874; p = 0.003) and 1.011 (95% confidence interval: 1.003–1.019; p = 0.008), respectively. The Kaplan-Meier curve shows an overall survival of 78% ± 4% at 5 years and 66% ± 10% at 10 years. Cox regression analysis revealed no independent risk factors for late mortality. The Bentall procedure is still the procedure of choice for aortic root replacement. Improvements in perioperative management in recent years has improved the early outcome, and in our experience, the late results of this technique were satisfactory.