Long-term outcome after aortic arch replacement with a trifurcated graft

Procedure-Associated Costs and Mid-Term Outcomes of Endovascular Zone 0 and Zone 1 Aortic Arch Repair

BACKGROUND

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) of proximal aortic arch pathology provides a less-invasive treatment option for high-risk patients ineligible for open arch reconstruction. However, the fiscal impact of these techniques remains unclear. Therefore, our objective was to characterize the mid-term outcomes after Zone 0 and Zone 1 TEVAR and describe the associated technical costs, revenues, and net margins at a single tertiary medical center.

METHODS

We examined all patients who underwent TEVAR between April 2011 and August 2019 via retrospective chart review. Patients were categorized by proximal endograft extent to identify Zone 0 or Zone 1 repairs. Procedural characteristics and outcomes were described. Technical costs, revenues, and margins were obtained from the hospital finance department.

RESULTS

We identified 10 patients (6 Zone 0, 4 Zone 1) who were denied open arch reconstruction. Patients were predominantly female (n = 8; 80%) and the mean age was 72.8 ± 5.5 years. TEVAR was performed in 5 asymptomatic patients, urgently in 3 symptomatic patients, and emergently in 2 ruptured patients. TEVAR plus extra-anatomic bypass was performed in 4 patients. Another 4 patients also received parallel stent-grafting while 1 patient received a branched thoracic endograft and yet another an in-situ laser fenestration followed by branch stent grafting. Within the 30-day postoperative period, 1 patient experienced stroke and 1 patient died. Bypass and branch vessel patency were 100% through the duration of follow-up (mean 19.3 months). Mean total technical cost associated with all procedures or repair stages was $105,164 ± $59,338 while mean net technical margin was -$25,055 ± $18,746. The net technical margin was negative for 9 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular repair of the proximal aortic arch is associated with good mid-term outcomes in patients considered too high-risk for open repair. However, reimbursement does not adequately cover treatment cost, with net technical margins being negative in nearly all cases. To remain financially sustainable, efforts should be made to both optimize aortic arch TEVAR delivery as well as advocate for reimbursement commensurate with associated costs.

Early outcome and mid-term survival after open arch repair using selective antegrade cerebral perfusion

OBJECTIVES

The introduction of selective antegrade cerebral perfusion technique as method of cerebral protection improved the outcome of open arch surgery. The aim of this study was to report early outcomes using this technique.

METHODS

Between 1997 and 2017, data were collected retrospectively for all patients who underwent surgical replacement of the aortic arch using selective antegrade cerebral perfusion (n = 938). To confirm the effectiveness of this cerebral protection method, early outcome and results were evaluated.

RESULTS

The incidence of postoperative permanent neurological dysfunction was 6.4%. Overall hospital mortality was 11.9% (n = 112). On multivariable analysis, age >75 years, female gender, euroscore at increment of 1 point, chronic renal failure, extension of thoracic aorta replacement and CPB time emerged as independent risk factors for hospital mortality. The mid-term survival at 1, 5, 10 and 15 years was 92%, 78%, 60% and 49%, respectively. The competing risk analysis for permanent neurological dysfunction and aortic reoperations was performed excluding the patients who died during the hospital stay. The cumulative incidence of permanent neurological dysfunction and aortic reoperations was 2% at 3 years, 3% at 5 years, 6% at 10 years, 12% at 3 years, 15% at 5 years and 19% at 10 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

From the early 90s to the present day, the selective antegrade cerebral perfusion has confirmed to be a useful and "safe" method of brain protection in aortic arch surgery in terms of postoperative neurological complications.

The results of aortic arch replacement using antegrade cerebral perfusion in haemodialysis patients: analysis of the Japan cardiovascular surgery database

OBJECTIVES

There have been limited data available regarding aortic arch replacement in dialysis patients. The purpose of this study was to examine real-world data and to determine the impact of preoperative dialysis status and other risks on surgical aortic arch replacement using the Japan Cardiovascular Surgery Database.

METHODS

A total of 5044 patients who underwent elective, isolated aortic arch replacement using antegrade cerebral perfusion during 2014-2017 were eligible for the study. Of these, 89 patients received haemodialysis preoperatively. The patients were divided into 6 groups according to their preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate and dialysis status for comparison. Preoperative and postoperative data were examined using a multivariable regression model.

RESULTS

The overall surgical mortality rates of non-Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) (estimated glomerular filtration rate >60 ml/min/1.73 m2), stage 3A, stage 3B, stage 4, stage 5 CKD and dialysis patients were 2.6%, 3.1%, 6.8%, 11.6%, 16.7% and 13.5%, respectively. After risk adjustment, dialysis was shown to be strongly associated with surgical mortality (odds ratio 4.39 and 95% confidence interval 2.22-8.72) and have a trend to be associated with postoperative stroke (odds ratio 2.02, 95% confidence interval 1.00-4.10, P = 0.051) when compared to the non-CKD group. As predictors of mortality, male sex, peripheral arterial disease, preoperative liver dysfunction and impaired left ventricular function were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

The Japanese nationwide database revealed the outcomes of aortic arch replacement in dialysis patients. Appropriate counselling and an alternative strategy should be considered for such patients with multiple risks for mortality.

Reoperative Total Arch Repair Using a Trifurcated Graft and Selective Antegrade Cerebral Perfusion

BACKGROUND

This study reviews the outcomes of our reoperative total arch repair (TAR) technique using a trifurcated graft and selective antegrade cerebral perfusion (SACP).

METHODS

Fifty patients underwent reoperative TAR from January 2005 to September 2020, with either a one-stage (N=9), or two-stage repair (N=41). The two-stage technique includes minimal dissection of the mediastinal structures, an arch-first technique using a trifurcated graft, and construction of a classical elephant trunk via a partial transverse incision distally in the old-graft or in the aorta just distal to the old graft.

RESULTS

The median age was 63 years. Chronic dissection was the most frequent indication (88%) and 98% had undergone a previous proximal aortic repair at a median interval of 3.0 years. The median cardiopulmonary bypass, myocardial ischemic, SACP, and lower body circulatory arrest times were 226, 103, 97, and 98 minutes, respectively. The minimum nasopharyngeal and bladder temperature were 16.5 °C, and 20.0 °C. Operative mortality was 2% and the incidence of stroke, and spinal cord injury (SCI) were 2%, and 0%. Stage II repair was performed in 37 patients (open: 33 patients, endovascular: 4 patients), with two mortalities and no SCI. The median duration between stage I and II was 63 days. Survival and aortic event free rates at 3 years were 88.4 ±4.9%, and 89.8 ±5.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

We report a reoperative TAR technique that minimizes dissection of the cardiac structures, simplifies the distal anastomosis, and protects vital organs, such as the brain, heart, and spinal cord.

Short-term outcomes of modified Y-graft technique in acute type a aortic dissection using the femoral artery bypass and one minute systemic circulatory arrest technique

Objective

Aortic arch replacement in acute type A aortic dissection patients remains the most challenging cardiovascular operation. Herein, we described our modified Y-graft technique using the Femoral Artery Bypass (FAB) and the One Minute Systemic Circulatory Arrest (OSCA) technique, and assessed the short-term outcomes of the patients.

Methods

Between February 2015 and November 2017, 51 patients with acute type A aortic dissection underwent aortic arch replacement. Among them, 23 patients underwent FAB while 28 patients underwent both FAB and OSCA. The intraoperative data and postoperative follow-up data were recorded. The follow-up data of patients with traditional Y-graft technique were collected from previously reported studies.

Results

In the FAB group, two patients died due to pulmonary infection (30-day survival rate, 91.3%), and two patients were paralyzed from the waist down. Hemodialysis was performed for five patients (21.7%) before hospital discharge. Fifteen patients (65.2%) received respiratory support for more than 2-days and eight patients (34.8%) for more than 5-days. These follow-up results were comparable or better than the patients with traditional Y-graft technique. Furthermore, compared to the FAB group, the morbidity due to neurological dysfunction and acute renal failure was significantly reduced in the FAB+OSCA group. Moreover, the respiratory support, length of postoperative stay and ICU stay were shortened.

Conclusions

This study clarified the feasibility of FAB and OSCA technique in modifying Y-graft technique. The acute type A aortic dissection patients showed less surgical complications and favorable short-term outcomes after this surgery.

Total Arch Replacement with Hypothermic Circulatory Arrest, Antegrade Cerebral Perfusion and the Y-graft

This study examines postoperative morbidity and mortality and long-term survival after total arch replacement (TAR) using deep to moderate hypothermic circulatory arrest (HCA), antegrade cerebral perfusion (ACP), and the Y-graft. Seventy-five patients underwent TAR with the Y graft. Deep to moderate HCA was initiated at 18-22°C. ACP was either initiated immediately (early ACP) or after the distal anastomosis was performed (late ACP). The arch vessels were then serially anastomosed to the individual limbs of the Y-graft. The median age was 66 years (range = 32-82). Etiology of aneurysmal dilatation included 20 (27%) patients with medial degenerations, 25 (33%) with chronic dissections, 14 (19%) with acute dissections, 9 (12%) with atherosclerosis and 2 (3%) with Marfan syndrome. In-hospital mortality was 5%. Neurologic complications occurred in 8 (11%) patients; 2 (3%) had strokes and 6 (8%) had transient neurologic deficits. Patients undergoing TAR with moderate hypothermia had a significantly higher incidence of new-onset renal insufficiency (3 [23%] vs [0%], P < 0.001) and TND (3 (23%) vs 3 (5%), P = 0.028) than the profound and deep hypothermia cohort. Excluding the 1 patient who died intraoperatively, 89% (95%CI: 79-94%) were alive at 1 year, 78% at 5 years (95%CI: 66-86%), and 73% at 10 years (95%CI: 59-82%). The combination of deep to moderate HCA, ACP, and the Y-graft is a safe and reproducible technique. Further inquiry is needed to assess if early ACP provides superior clinical outcomes.

Zone zero hybrid arch exclusion versus open total arch replacement

Open total aortic arch replacement is one of the most technically demanding operations in cardiothoracic surgery, requiring operator expertise and intraoperative and postoperative teamwork. Despite current advancements in the field of open aortic surgery with regard to intraoperative brain protection and postoperative care, the morbidity and mortality associated with open total arch operations varies. Endovascular and hybrid procedures involving the use of zone 0 as a landing zone allow fair comparison between open total arch and hybrid operations. Hybrid procedures involving all of the other landing zones [1-4] should not be compared with open total arch replacement, as the extent of the pathology is different.

Early and mid-term outcomes of endovascular and open surgical repair of non-dissected aortic arch aneurysm†

OBJECTIVES

With the introduction of endovascular stent graft technology, a variety of surgical options are available for patients with aortic aneurysms. We sought to evaluate early-term and mid-term outcomes of patients undergoing endovascular and open surgical repair for non-dissected aortic arch aneurysm.

METHODS

Overall, 200 patients underwent treatment for isolated non-dissected aortic arch aneurysm between January 2008 and February 2016: 133 patients had open surgery and 67, endovascular repair. Early-term and mid-term outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

Seventy percent ( n  = 47) needing endovascular repair underwent fenestrated stent graft and 30% ( n  = 20) underwent the debranched technique. Patients in the open surgery group were younger (71 vs 75 years, P  < 0.001) and had a lower prevalence of ischaemic heart disease (11% vs 35%, P  < 0.001). Intensive care unit stay (1 vs 3 days, P  < 0.001), hospital stay (11 vs 17 days, P  < 0.001) and surgical time (208 vs 390 min, P  < 0.001) were lower in the endovascular repair group than in the open surgery group. There were 3 in-hospital deaths each in the open surgery and endovascular groups (2% vs 5%, respectively, P  = 0.40). Mid-term survival ( P  < 0.001) and freedom from reintervention ( P  = 0.009) were better in the open surgery than in the endovascular repair group. No aneurysm-related deaths were observed. The propensity-matched comparison ( n  = 58) demonstrated that survival was better in the open surgery group ( P  = 0.011); no significant difference was seen in the reintervention rate ( P  = 0.28).

CONCLUSIONS

Close follow-up for re-intervention may reduce the risk for aneurysm-related deaths and provide acceptable outcomes in patients undergoing endovascular repair.

Total Aortic Arch Replacement: Advantages of Varied Techniques

We review the operative techniques of aortic arch replacement. Aortic arch replacement presents several formidable challenges, as it requires arresting the circulation to the body and replacement of the brachiocephalic vessels with special consideration for protecting the central nervous system. Perfusion strategies, selective antegrade cerebral perfusion, and operative graft selection are key elements in aortic arch replacement surgery. Standard approaches include the island technique, the branched graft technique, and the "Spielvogel" trifurcated graft technique-each having its own advantages. In addition, thoracic aortic aneurysms involving the arch and descending aorta pose a substantial surgical challenge and often require hybrid or nonclamp technique with staged operative interventions. Hybrid and endovascular (thoracic endovascular aortic repair) techniques for the descending aorta are evolving and require consideration in operative planning. Areas of controversy include management of the subclavian artery, extent of distal arch replacement, elephant trunk and hybrid frozen elephant trunk techniques, and use and timing of staged approaches. Aortic arch replacement remains a complex, potentially difficult procedure. Better understanding of the potential open approaches to arch replacement will optimize the potential outcomes for patients. Aortic arch pathology is best served by tailoring the procedure to the patient-specific anatomy and pathology.

Outcomes of aortic arch replacement surgery after previous cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

Aortic arch replacement is a potentially high-risk operation and in the re-operative setting has been found to be a risk factor for poor outcome, yet there is a dearth of published data specifically on this topic. The aim of the study was to review our unit's outcomes in this re-operative setting.

METHOD

Data were collated for all patients who underwent aortic arch replacement surgery after previous cardiac surgery from January 1988 to November 2011. The patients were divided based primarily on elective versus non-elective and also early (≤2005) and late (≥2006) series.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven eligible patients (22 male; median age: 53.0 years; elective: 14, non-elective: 13) were identified. There was a mean period of 14.5 years between the first operation and the subsequent aortic arch replacement. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 22.2% - 0% elective and 46.2% non-elective (P = 0.004). Overall permanent neurological dysfunction was 21.7% - 28.6% elective and 11.1% non-elective (P = 0.463). There were 11 early-series patients and 16 late-series patients. For early-series patients, 90.9% were non-elective versus 18.8% in the late-series patients. The 30-day mortality rate was 54.5% early series versus 0% late series.

CONCLUSION

Aortic arch replacement is high risk in the re-operative setting. These risks are even greater for non-elective procedures. This highlights the need for aggressive first-time surgery to reduce re-operative procedures and good long-term follow-up programmes to allow elective procedures if required.

Alternative perfusion technique without axillary artery cannulation during combined aortic root and total arch replacement

This report describes an effective cerebral perfusion method using an additional 4th side limb graft sewn to a trifurcated graft in patients undergoing redo aortic root reconstruction combined with total aortic arch replacement. This method is useful in cases where the origin of the innominate artery is unsuitable for clamping or when axillary perfusion is not employed, and assures continuous brain protection and minimizes circulatory arrest time.

Total arch replacement in patients with aortic dissection with an isolated left vertebral artery

BACKGROUND

The presence of an isolated left vertebral artery requires changes in the aortic arch reconstruction techniques and cerebral protection methods in patients with total arch replacement. The best method for surgical repair of the isolated left vertebral artery is controversial. We retrospectively reviewed our experience of total arch replacement in patients with aortic dissection with this vessel anomaly.

METHODS

Between August 2003 and December 2008, 21 patients with aortic dissection (type A dissection, n = 20; type B dissection, n = 1) with an isolated left vertebral artery underwent total arch replacement under hypothermic cardiopulmonary bypass combined with selective cerebral perfusion. Concomitant stented elephant trunk was implanted in 20 patients.

RESULTS

There was no in-hospital death. Injury to the spinal cord occurred in 2 patients with chronic dissection using stented elephant trunk implantation. One had weakness in the left lower extremity, and the other patient had paraparesis: both recovered during the follow-up period. One patient experienced transient neurologic deficit, and acute renal failure was observed in 1 patient: both recovered completely before hospital discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Acceptable results were obtained in patients with aortic dissection with an isolated left vertebral artery. Although there was no clear evidence that the spinal cord injury was related to the isolated left vertebral artery using stented elephant trunk implantation, the isolated left vertebral artery was constructed as soon as possible in patients with this vessel anomaly.

Acute aortic dissection type A

Background

Acute aortic dissection type A (AADA) is a life-threatening vascular emergency. Clinical presentation ranges from pain related to the acute event, collapse due to aortic rupture or pericardial tamponade, or manifestations of organ or limb ischaemia. The purpose of this review was to clarify important clinical issues of AADA management, with a focus on diagnostic and therapeutic challenges.

Methods

Based on a MEDLINE search the latest literature on this topic was reviewed. Results from the German Registry for Acute Aortic Dissection Type A (GERAADA) are also described.

Results

Currently, the perioperative mortality rate of AADA is below 20 per cent, the rate of definitive postoperative neurological impairment approaches 12 per cent and the long-term prognosis after surviving the acute phase of the disease is good. Many pathology- and therapy-associated factors influence the outcome of AADA, including prompt diagnosis with computed tomography and better cerebral protection strategies during aortic arch reconstruction. Endovascular technologies are emerging that may lead to less invasive treatment options.

Conclusion

AADA is an emergency that can present with a wide variety of clinical scenarios. Advances in the surgical management of this complex disease are improving outcomes.

Aortic arch replacement using a trifurcated graft

A critical consideration in the operative strategy for aortic arch replacement, how best to protect the brain while providing surgical access to the cerebral vessels, involves two key aspects: minimizing cerebral ischaemia and preventing cerebral embolization of air and atheromatous debris. We describe a technique, using a trifurcated branched graft, that combines hypothermic circulatory arrest, selective antegrade perfusion and axillary artery cannulation.

Evolution in the techniques and outcomes of aortic arch surgery: a 22 year single centre experience

BACKGROUND

Aortic arch replacement is a complicated and high risk procedure. There have been many advances over recent years. We review the changes in our unit's techniques and outcomes over the past 22 years.

METHODS

Data were collated from databases and medical records for all patients who underwent aortic arch replacement surgery from January 1989 to December 2010. The patients were divided into two groups - Group A (1989-2005) and Group B (2006-2010). Data were analysed to compare early and late series patients' outcomes. Logistic regression was used to identify variables that predicted mortality.

RESULTS

Seventy-five eligible patients (56 males; mean age: 57.5 years; Group A: 40, Group B 35) were identified. There were great changes in the technique and the methods of cerebral protection. The overall mortality rate was 30.7% - Group A: 50% and Group B: 8.6% (p<0.001). Overall permanent neurological dysfunction was 23.7% - Group A: 40% and Group B: 11.8% (p=0.012). Cardiovascular disease and circulatory arrest time were significant predictors of mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased experience and volume and advances in techniques over 22 years have resulted in major improvements in outcomes for patients having aortic arch replacement, allowing the procedure to be performed with greatly improved outcomes.