The “thoracic endovascular aortic repair-first” strategy for acute type A dissection with mesenteric malperfusion: Initial results compared with conventional algorithms

Aortic arch registry of type a aortic dissection (AoArch) - rationale, design and definition criteria

BACKGROUND

Type A acute aortic dissection (TAAAD) is a deadly condition that demands immediate surgery, because it involves a critically. The mortality and morbidity associated with it are significant, and it is vital that the patient's conditions and treatment strategies are fully understood to ensure the appropriate management of TAAAD. This study aims to ascertain whether hemiarch repair (HAR) versus extended arch repair (EAR) with or without descending aortic intervention results in better perioperative and late outcomes for patients with TAAAD.

METHODS

Four leading centers of cardiac surgery from two European countries have joined forces to create a groundbreaking multicenter observational registry (AoArch). This study was approved by the institutional review board (IRB 202201173). We conducted a retrospective review (NCT00591263) of our prospectively maintained database for patients who underwent operative repair of DeBakey type I or type II dissection from January 1, 2005 to March 2024 (NCT05927090). We will analyze how patient co-morbidities, referral conditions, and surgical strategies involving hemi-arch repair (HAR) and extended arch repair (EAR) impact early and late adverse events. We have developed a procedure urgency algorithm based on the severity of preoperative hemodynamic conditions and malperfusion due to TAAAD, and we will use it to assess the primary clinical outcomes: in-hospital mortality, late mortality, and reoperations on the aorta. We will define secondary outcomes as permanent neurologic deficit, the need for new dialysis, respiratory failure, a composite of major adverse events (myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accidents, the need for dialysis, or the need for tracheostomy), and a composite of major adverse pulmonary events (intubation over 48 h, pneumonia, reintubation, tracheostomy), and reoperation due to bleeding.

DISCUSSION

This multicenter registry will definitively determine the prognostic significance of critical preoperative conditions and the efficacy of extended arch interventions and hemiarch repair in reducing the risk of early adverse events after surgery for TAAAD. This registry will provide insights into the long-term durability of different strategies of surgical repair for TAAAD.

Performance of the open-first repair strategy in type A aortic dissection with mesenteric malperfusion syndrome eligible for delayed repair

OBJECTIVE

For patients with type A aortic dissection complicated by mesenteric malperfusion syndrome, some centers advocate a nontraditional approach based on up-front endovascular intervention and delayed open repair. However, the efficacy of this strategy cannot be understood without first understanding outcomes of the traditional open-first strategy in the same select patient population eligible for delayed repair, applying modern techniques of hybrid aortic surgery.

METHODS

Patients with acute type A aortic dissection and mesenteric malperfusion syndrome were queried from a single institution. Those presenting with aortic rupture, tamponade, or cardiogenic shock (ineligible for delayed repair) were excluded. Patients were managed with immediate open aortic repair. Short-term and long-term outcomes are reported.

RESULTS

A total of 1228 patients were treated for acute type A dissection in the study period, of whom 77 were included in the mesenteric malperfusion syndrome cohort. In-hospital mortality was 29% compared with 39% in an identically selected mesenteric malperfusion syndrome population undergoing delayed repair reported previously. Among patients with mesenteric malperfusion syndrome, 32% underwent additional procedures addressing distal malperfusion in a hybrid operating room during or after open repair. Concomitant proximal malperfusion (coronary, cerebral, or upper extremity) was common in the mesenteric malperfusion syndrome cohort, present in 35% of cases. Although early mortality was greater in the mesenteric malperfusion syndrome cohort compared with all acute type A dissections, 10-year survival among those discharged alive was similar (65% vs 59%, P = .18).

CONCLUSIONS

The traditional open-first repair strategy performs equal to or better than the delayed repair strategy for patients with mesenteric malperfusion syndrome eligible for delayed repair.

Survival after operative repair of acute type A aortic dissection varies according to the presence and type of preoperative malperfusion

OBJECTIVE

Approximately one-quarter of patients with acute type A aortic dissection (TAAD) present with concomitant malperfusion of coronary arteries, mesenteric circulation, lower extremities, kidneys, brain, and/or coma. It is generally accepted that TAAD patients who present with malperfusion experience higher mortality rates than patients without, although how specific malperfusion syndromes, alone or in combination, affect mortality is not well described.

METHODS

The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection database was queried for patients who underwent surgical repair of TAAD. Patients were stratified according to the presence/absence of malperfusion at presentation. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate in-hospital mortality according to malperfusion type. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to estimate 30-day postoperative survival.

RESULTS

Six thousand four hundred thirty-seven patients underwent surgical repair of acute TAAD, of whom 2642 (41%) had 1 or more preoperative malperfusion syndromes. Mesenteric malperfusion (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 4.84; P < .001) was associated with the highest odds of in-hospital mortality, followed by coma (AOR, 1.88; P = .007), limb ischemia (AOR, 1.73; P = .008), and coronary malperfusion (AOR, 1.51; P = .02). Renal malperfusion (AOR, 1.37; P = .24) and neurologic deficit (AOR, 1.35; P = .28) were not associated with increased in-hospital mortality. In patients who survived to discharge, there was no difference in 1-year postdischarge survival in the malperfusion and no malperfusion cohorts (P = .36).

CONCLUSIONS

Survival during the index admission after TAAD repair varies according to the presence and type of malperfusion syndromes, with mesenteric malperfusion being associated with the highest odds of in-hospital death. Not only the presence of malperfusion but rather specific malperfusion syndromes should be considered when assessing a patient's risk of undergoing TAAD repair.

Comparison of reperfusion- and central repair-first strategies for acute type a dissection with mesenteric malperfusion: a single-center retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

We seek to compare the early and late outcomes of reperfusion-first versus central repair-first strategies in patients with acute type A dissection (ATAAD) complicated by mesenteric malperfusion.

METHODS

Among 68 patients, reperfusion-first strategy with superior mesenteric artery (SMA) stenting was adopted in 31 and central repair-first in 37, based on rupture risk and circulatory compromise, severity, time and mechanisms of mesenteric ischemia. Early and late outcomes were compared between two strategies. Follow-up was 100% at 3.3±1.4 years.

RESULTS

Mean age was 50.6±11.4 years (59 males, 86.8%). The reperfusion-first group had more celiac artery involvement (74.2% vs. 48.6%) and peritoneal irritation signs (19.4% vs. 2.7%), while central repair-first group had more tamponade (27% vs. 3.2%). Early mortality was 48.6% (18/37) with central repair-first strategy versus 19.4% (6/31) in reperfusion-first group (P=0.012). Reperfusion-first patients had fewer gastrointestinal complications (12.9% vs. 54.1%, P<0.001) and respiratory failure (3.2% vs. 24.3%, P=0.017). At 5 years, SMA stent patency was 84%, and survival was significantly higher in reperfusion-first patients (80.6% vs. 45.9%, P=0.009), with similar freedom from adverse events between two groups (74.9% vs. 76.0%, P=0.812). Tamponade (hazard ratio [HR], 3.093; P=0.023), peritoneal irritation signs (HR, 8.559; P=0.006), and lactate (mmol/L) (HR, 1.279; P<0.001) were predictors for all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In this series of ATAAD patients with mesenteric malperfusion, the reperfusion-first strategy with SMA stenting could significantly reduce the mortality risk and achieved favorable late survival and freedom from adverse events. These results argue favorably for the use of the reperfusion-first strategy in such patients.

Surgical choice for the treatment of partial intestinal ischemic necrosis caused by acute type a aortic dissection combined with malperfusion of superior mesenteric artery

Acute type A aortic dissection is a severe cardiovascular disease characterized by rapid onset and high mortality. Traditionally, urgent open aortic repair is performed after admission to prevent aortic rupture and death. However, when combined with malperfusion syndrome, the low perfusion of the superior mesenteric artery can further lead to intestinal necrosis, significantly impacting the surgery's prognosis and potentially resulting in adverse consequences, bringing. This presents great significant challenges in treatment. Based on recent domestic and international research literature, this paper reviews the mechanism, current treatment approaches, and selection of surgical methods for poor organ perfusion caused by acute type A aortic dissection. The literature review findings suggest that central aortic repair can be employed for the treatment of acute type A aortic dissection with inadequate perfusion of the superior mesenteric artery. The superior mesenteric artery can be windowed and (/or) stented, followed by delayed aortic repair. Priority should be given to revascularization of the superior mesenteric artery, followed by central aortic repair. During central aortic repair, direct blood perfusion should be performed on the distal true lumen of the superior mesenteric artery, leading to resulting in favorable therapeutic outcomes. The research results indicate that even after surgical aortic repair, intestinal ischemic necrosis may still occur. In such cases, prompt laparotomy and necessary necrotic bowel resection are crucial for saving the patient's life.

Endovascular stenting of the ascending aorta for visceral malperfusion in a patient with type A aortic dissection

A type A aortic dissection is a challenging condition for both cardiothoracic and vascular surgeons. Although open surgery remains the gold standard, there is considerable interest in the use of endovascular techniques for patients who present with malperfusion. We present the case of an unstable 55-year-old man with visceral malperfusion from a type A dissection who was stabilized using an endovascular technique as a bridge to open surgery. A bare metal thoracic endograft was used in the ascending aorta to rapidly restore perfusion. This hybrid approach to the problem of malperfusion in type A dissection could be useful for these patients with complicated cases.

Risk Factors and Early Outcomes for Gastrointestinal Complications in Patients Undergoing Open Surgery for Type A Aortic Dissection

BACKGROUND

Gastrointestinal complications need to be paid more attention, especially in critically ill patients. The purpose of this study was to identify the risk factors and short-term outcomes of gastrointestinal complications after open surgery for type A aortic dissection.

METHODS

A retrospective single-institutional study including patients who underwent open surgery for type A aortic dissection during 2012-2020 was conducted. Univariate analysis and logistic regression analysis were used to identify risk factors associated with gastrointestinal complications. The related clinical outcomes were compared between the patients with and without gastrointestinal complications.

RESULTS

Among the 2746 patients, 150 developed gastrointestinal complications. The development of gastrointestinal complications contributed to the higher rate of mortality (P = .008), longer stay in the intensive care unit (P < .001), and longer hospital stay (P < .001). Logistic regression analysis showed that age (odds ratio [OR] 1.020; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.005-1.057; P = .011), American Society of Anesthesiologists classification greater than grade III (OR 1.724; 95%CI 1.179-2.521, P = .005), pre-induction mean arterial pressure (OR 0.978; 95%CI 0.965-0.990, P = .001), aortic cross-clamp time (OR 1.012; 95%CI 1.005-1.019, P = .001), cardiopulmonary bypass time (OR 1.007; 95%CI 1.002-1.011, P = .002), and intraoperative transfusion of red blood cells (OR 1.214; 95%CI 1.122-1.314, P = .001) were independent risk factors for gastrointestinal complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of gastrointestinal complications after open surgery for type A aortic dissection was 5.5%, resulting in increased mortality and prolonged hospital stay. It is necessary to take suitable strategies to reduce the incidence of gastrointestinal complications.

2022 ACC/AHA guideline for the diagnosis and management of aortic disease: A report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

The role of delayed aortic surgery in type A aortic dissection and mesenteric ischemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Approximately one third of patients with Acute Type A Aortic Dissection (ATAAD) present with pre-operative malperfusion syndromes (MPS). Of these, mesenteric malperfusion represents the greatest risk to patients with respect to increased short-term mortality. In select patients, it may be feasible to offer a staged approach by treating the mesenteric malperfusion first, optimizing the patient in the intensive care setting and then, following with a central aortic repair. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize cohort studies assessing the role of pre-operative interventions for mesenteric malperfusion.

METHODS

An electronic literature search of five databases was performed to identify all relevant studies providing studies examining short-term mortality on patients who underwent either endovascular or open revascularisation of mesenteric ischemia prior to central aortic repair. The primary outcome was all-cause, short-term mortality. Secondary outcomes were comparative mortality between a delayed repair vs. aortic repair first strategy, rates of postoperative laparotomy, bowel resection, and mortality following delayed aortic repair.

RESULTS

The search strategy identified 8 studies qualifying for inclusion, with a total of 180 patients who underwent delayed aortic surgery in the setting of mesenteric MPS. The weighted short-term mortality following a mesenteric revascularisation first, delayed aortic surgery strategy was 22.5%. This strategy was also associated with a significantly lower mortality than a central repair first strategy (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.02-0.27), and a significantly lower rate of postoperative laparotomy/bowel resection (OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.02-0.14). If patients survive to receive central repair, the weighted short-term mortality postoperatively is low (2.1%).

CONCLUSION

A summary of this evidence reveals a lower short-term mortality in hemodynamically stable patients with mesenteric malperfusion, along with a reduction in postoperative laparotomy/bowel resections. Of those patients who survive to receive central repair, short-term mortality remains very low in the select group of hemodynamically stable patients. Further high-quality studies with randomized or propensity matched data are required to verify these results.

Progression of distal aorta after endovascular fenestration/stenting in acute type A aortic dissection with malperfusion syndrome

Objective

The study objective was to evaluate the progression of dissected distal aorta in patients with acute type A aortic dissection with malperfusion syndrome treated with endovascular fenestration/stenting and delayed open aortic repair.

Methods

From 1996 to 2021, 927 patients presented with acute type A aortic dissection. Of these, 534 had DeBakey I dissection with no malperfusion syndrome and underwent emergency open aortic repair (no malperfusion syndrome group), whereas 97 patients with malperfusion syndrome underwent fenestration/stenting and delayed open aortic repair (malperfusion syndrome group). Sixty-three patients with malperfusion syndrome treated with fenestration/stenting were excluded due to no open aortic repair, including death from organ failure (n = 31), death from aortic rupture (n = 16), and discharged alive (n = 16).

Results

Compared with the no malperfusion syndrome group, the malperfusion syndrome group had more patients with acute renal failure (60% vs 4.3%, P < .001). Both groups had similar aortic root and arch procedures. Postoperatively, the malperfusion syndrome group had similar operative mortality (5.2% vs 7.9%, P = .35) and permanent dialysis (4.7% vs 2.9%, P = .50), but more new-onset dialysis (22% vs 7.7%, P < .001) and prolonged ventilation (72% vs 49%, P < .001). The growth rate of the aortic arch (0.38 vs 0.35 mm/year, P = .81) was similar between the malperfusion syndrome and no malperfusion syndrome groups. The descending thoracic aorta growth rate (1.03 vs 0.68 mm/year, P = .001) and abdominal aorta growth rate (0.76 vs 0.59 mm/year, P = .02) were significantly higher in the malperfusion syndrome group. The cumulative incidence of reoperation over 10 years (18% vs 18%, P = .81) and 15-year survival outcome (50% vs 48%, P = .43) were similar between the malperfusion syndrome and no malperfusion syndrome groups.

Conclusions

Endovascular fenestration/stenting followed by delayed open aortic repair was a valid approach for patients with malperfusion syndrome.

Management of noncerebral malperfusion complicating acute type A dissection

Vital organ malperfusion in acute type A aortic dissection is associated with worse outcomes, especially when multiple organ systems are involved, and when coronary or mesenteric malperfusion is present. To achieve the two goals of central aortic repair and adequate and timely reperfusion, mechanism and organ-specific strategy in the methods and sequence of repair should be considered. For dynamic aortic malperfusion, reperfusion can be quickly achieved by femoral artery perfusion, and the fenestrated frozen elephant trunk operation, in which the proximal end of device is secured to zone 1 or 2 and distal 1 or 2 supra-aortic vessels are preserved by fenestration of the fabric, seems optimal as a method of central aortic repair. For coronary malperfusion, percutaneous coronary intervention before central aortic repair may have a role. However, it should be kept in mind that the door-to-unloading time is also important to reduce the area of myocardial infarction, and retrograde cardioplegia is not distributed to most of the right ventricle, which can be critical when right coronary malperfusion is present. Static mesenteric malperfusion should be addressed first, and second-look laparotomy should not be hesitated after central aortic repair. The use of a hybrid operating room may be an optimal solution to achieve both goals.

Midterm Outcomes in Type A Aortic Dissection Repair With and Without Malperfusion in a Hybrid Operating Room

Treatment approach to type A aortic dissection with malperfusion, immediate open aortic repair vs upfront endovascular treatment, remains controversial. From January 2017 to July 2021, 301 consecutive type A repairs were evaluated at our institution. Starting in 2019, all type A aortic dissections were performed in a fixed-fluoroscopy, hybrid operating room. Propensity score matching was used to control baseline patient characteristics between traditional and hybrid operating room approaches. There were 144 patients in the traditional group and 157 in the hybrid group. In the hybrid group, 41% (64/157) underwent intraoperative angiograms, and of those, 58% (37/64) received at least 1 endovascular intervention. Following propensity matching, 125 patients remained in each the traditional and hybrid groups. Thirty-day survival was significantly improved in the hybrid cohort at 96.7% (122/125) as compared to the traditional cohort at 87.2% (109/125) (P = 0.002). There were no significant differences in perioperative paralysis (1.6% vs 1.6%, P > 0.9), new hemodialysis (12% vs 9.6%, P = 0.5), fasciotomy (2.4% vs 5.6%, P = 0.20, and exploratory laparotomy (1.6% vs 4.8%, P = 0.3). The hybrid operating room approach to type A aortic dissection, provides the ability to immediately assess distal malperfusion and perform endovascular interventions at the time of open aortic repair, and is associated with significantly higher 30-day and 2-year survival when compared to a stepwise repair approach in a traditional operating room.

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate. Structure: Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

Revascularization-first strategy versus central repair-first strategy for acute type A aortic dissection complicated with mesenteric malperfusion syndrome: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The optimal therapeutic strategy for acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) accompanied by mesenteric malperfusion syndrome (mMPS) has not been fully elucidated. The intent of this meta-analysis was to analyze the effectiveness and safety of the revascularization-first strategy among patients with ATAAD complicated with mMPS through comprehensive comparisons with the central repair-first strategy.

METHODS

Studies relevant to the comparison of the outcomes of early reperfusion combined with delayed proximal aortic repair and initial central repair in the treatment of ATAAD complicated with mMPS, were systematacially searched using PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Embase up to June 30, 2022. And the primary outcome was early mortality, with mesenteric complications, adverse aortic events and hypothermic circulatory arrest (HCA) time served as the secondary outcomes. Screening of the relevant studies, data extraction, and assessment of the included studies were conducted by two authors independently. Standard statistical procedures provided in Review Manager 5.3 were used to perform all statistical analyses.

RESULTS

Five studies comprising 72 patients in total were included into the quantitative synthesis. In-hospital/30-day mortality was significantly reduced in patients receiving the revascularization-first strategy than in those with the central repair-first strategy, with a pooled risk ratio (RR) of 0.46 (p = .04, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.22-0.95). The revascularization-first strategy resulted in a lower incidence of mesenteric complications compared with the central repair-first strategy, with a pooled RR of 0.15 (p = .0002, 95% CI: 0.05-0.41). Moreover, no significant difference was found in the comparison of the revascularization-first strategy and central repair-first strategy regarding adverse aortic events (p = .31, 95% CI: 0.44-12.78). Compared with central repair-first, a longer HCA time was observed in revascularization-first with mean difference of 9.91 (p = .02, 95% CI: 1.34-18.48).

CONCLUSIONS

The revascularization-first strategy presented a lower in-hospital/30-day mortality and mesenteric complications than the central repair-first strategy without increasing the incidence of adverse aortic events. However, the revascularization-first strategy indicated a longer HCA time than the central repair-first strategy.

Successful management of iliofemoral and visceral malperfusion syndrome in acute type A aortic dissection with endovascular revascularization followed by delayed proximal aortic repair

Acute type A aortic dissection with malperfusion syndrome is associated with high mortality. Despite having no consensus-based guidelines, we believe the "endovascular-first" approach should be undertaken. This report describes the successful management of iliofemoral and visceral malperfusion syndrome with endovascular revascularization followed by delayed proximal aortic repair after acute type A aortic dissection.

Visceral and renal malperfusion syndromes in acute aortic dissection type A: the fate of the branch vessel

BACKGROUND

Malperfusion in acute aortic dissection is not uncommonly observed and associated with a highly significant increase in mortality and morbidity. Of the various malperfusion syndromes, visceral and renal involvement is the most challenging in terms of correct and timely diagnosis as well as the choice of management strategy. The aim of this study was to identify the pathology and associated fate of each visceral and renal vessel in acute type A dissections.

METHODS

Over a 12-year period, 167 consecutive patients with acute dissection type A extending into the thoracoabdominal aorta were included and radiographic images analyzed with a focus on individual branch vessel pathology and dependent organ perfusion.

RESULTS

Sixty-five patients (39%) were diagnosed with radiological signs of malperfusion on the CT Images. Of those, 20% expired during the hospital stay, compared to 8% without malperfusion. The left renal artery was the most frequently affected by dissection (31%) or false lumen supply (28%). False lumen perfusion was more often associated with manifest malperfusion than an extension of the dissection flap into the branch vessel. During the study period, there was no preference of surgical procedure treating the malperfusion.

CONCLUSIONS

Malperfusion of the visceral/renal branches of a dissected aorta represents a manifest indicator for postoperative mortality and morbidity. Neither clinical outcome, nor the fate of individual vessels can reliably be predicted prior to proximal reconstruction and thus, surgical strategy cannot generally be defined alone by radiological findings.

The effects of DeBakey type acute aortic dissection and preoperative peripheral and cardiac malperfusion on the outcomes after surgical repair

Introduction

Emergent surgical repair of DeBakey type I and II acute aortic dissection represents the standard of care to prevent lethal complications.

Aim

Evaluation of the effect of extension of aortic dissection (AAD) according to DeBakey classification, type I and II AAD, and the relationship with preoperative peripheral and myocardial malperfusion on early outcome and the mid-term follow-up period.

Material and methods

A total of 135 patients who underwent AAD surgery between January 2015 and October 2019 were analysed.

Results

In total 103 patients were affected by DeBakey type I AAD and 32 by DeBakey type II; 56 patients preoperatively showed peripheral, cardiac malperfusion, or both. Intra-operative mortality was 11%. Postoperative peripheral, cardiac malperfusion, and intraoperative and postoperative mortality were lower for type II AAD. The protective factor for intra- and postoperative 60-day mortality was type II AAD (RR = 0.03, p = 0.001); independent predictors were hypertension, and preoperative cardiac and renal-visceral malperfusion. At 5 years the overall survival was 74 ±6.9%. Independent predictors of reduced survival were major extension of type I AAD (RR = 5.37, p < 0.05) and preoperative cardiac malperfusion (RR = 5.78, p < 0.05). Five-year freedom from cardiac death, redo surgical operation, and new vascular procedures on the thoracic and abdominal aorta was 92 ±5.7%, 99 ±1.2%, and 81 ±7.2%, respectively. Extension of DeBakey type I AAD into the thoracic-abdominal aorta segment was also a predictor of the need for new vascular procedures (RR = 1.66, p = 0.05).

Conclusions

A more favourable anatomy of DeBakey type II AAD is associated with better early and late outcomes after aortic repair. This is due to a lower incidence of peripheral and cardiac malperfusion.

Computed Tomography Imaging of Aortic Dissections with Endovascular Treatment Considerations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In the present review, we discuss the role of CT imaging in the management of aortic dissection, with a particular emphasis on endovascular treatment considerations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Computed tomography imaging is a fundamental tool in the diagnosis and management of acute and chronic aortic dissection. Its diagnostic accuracy and high resolution contribute to and guide operative strategy. Persistent high mortality for patients who develop aortic dissections suggests a need for innovative diagnostic and treatment strategies. In the recent era, considerable advances have been made in computed tomography (CT) image acquisition, processing, and analysis as well as endovascular technologies with expanded roles in the treatment of aortic diseases.

Mesenteric Malperfusion Syndromes in Type A Aortic Dissection: Current Management Strategies

Acute type A aortic dissection is a surgical emergency associated with high mortality and morbidity. When complicated with mesenteric malperfusion, its management carries a very high mortality. Many innovations in the field of vascular and cardiothoracic surgery in the last two decades have been tried in the continuous efforts to improve on the surgical outcomes. Although some reports have documented better mortality rates with reperfusion-first strategies, there is still room for improvement in the absence of a general consensus on its management.

Morphologic characteristics and endovascular management of acute type B dissection patients with superior mesenteric artery involvement

OBJECTIVE

Despite its association with static mesenteric malperfusion, the morphologic characteristics and optimal management of acute type B aortic dissection (ABAD) with superior mesenteric artery (SMA) involvement are poorly understood. We studied the associated risk factors and reported the outcomes of endovascular treatment.

METHODS

From May 2016 to May 2018, we examined 212 consecutive patients with ABAD in our center. Those with SMA involvement (SMAI) were included in the present study and divided into those with and without mesenteric malperfusion (MMP) according to the clinical findings. After thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with or without SMA revascularization, we compared the clinical data, imaging results, and outcomes for those with and without MMP.

RESULTS

Computed tomography angiography confirmed 44 cases of SMAI: 12 (27.3%) with MMP and 32 (72.7%) without MMP. The patients with MMP had presented more frequently with lower extremity malperfusion (33.3% vs 3.1%; P = .023) than had those without MMP, with an odds ratio of 14.15 (P = .047). Multivariate analysis showed that patients with a low true lumen (TL)/false lumen (FL) diameter ratio of the SMA (TL/FL-SMA <1) had a greater risk of developing MMP than those with a high TL/FL-SMA ratio of >1 (odds ratio, 8.49; 95% confidence interval, 1.24-58.26; P = .029). SMA TL thrombosis was a significant predictor of the requirement for additional SMA revascularization after TEVAR among patients with MMP (P = .045). During a mean 10-month follow-up period, complete FL thrombosis in the SMA was seen in 11 patients (25%; 33.3% with MMP vs 21.9% without MMP; P = .43). The overall mortality rate was 6.82% (16.7% in the MMP group and 3.1% in the non-MMP group; P = .09).

CONCLUSIONS

In the present study, limb ischemia and the TL/FL-SMA ratio were two independent predictors for the development of MMP in patients with ABAD and SMAI. We found that TEVAR can be safely performed for these patients, and SMA TL thrombosis predicted for the need for SMA revascularization.

Treatment strategies for malperfusion syndrome secondary to acute aortic dissection

OBJECTIVE

Presenting our experience of treating patients with organ malperfusion secondary to acute aortic dissection.

PATIENTS

Among 383 patients who underwent aortic repair for acute type A aortic dissection from 1999 to 2017, 107 patients were operated on because of vascular complications. Fourteen patients had coronary, 50 had brain, 3 had paraplegia, 13 had superior mesenteric artery, 21 had lower limb, and 16 had combined organ malperfusion. Age was 65.8 years.

RESULTS

In coronary malperfusion, three had a preoperative percutaneous coronary intervention, and two had mechanical support. All underwent repair of the aorta. Hospital mortality was 28.5%. Fifty patients had brain malperfusion. Hemiplegia was found in 28 patients, transient ischemic attack in 10, and coma in 12. The level of consciousness was severe in 12, moderate in 18, and mild in 20. Twenty-eight percent died of a stroke. Nine had direct perfusion from the right common carotid artery, and the consciousness level was improved in 5 patients. Eight patients had mesenteric malperfusion. Four patients had a central aorta repair first, and four patients had peripheral intervention first. Three patients had a bypass grafting to the superior mesenteric artery, and one had a catheter intervention. Postoperative mortality was found in four patients due to bowel necrosis and six required resections of the bowel.

CONCLUSION

Acute organ malperfusion caused by the aortic dissection requires accurate and prompt diagnosis to proceed with an appropriate intervention before repairing the central aorta for preventing irreversible organ damage.

Management of Type A Aortic Dissection with Malperfusion Syndrome: A Case Report

Acute type A aortic dissection (TAAD) with malperfusion syndrome remains a challenging diagnosis and optimal surgical management remains unsettled. We present a case and surgical approach employed for a patient with TAAD and malperfusion syndrome who presented with pulseless bilaterally extremities. Satisfactory outcomes can be achieved with early multidisciplinary collaboration and urgent repair of the aorta and simultaneous efforts to restore blood flow to ischemic tissue.

Acute Aortic Occlusion and Its Sequelae: Metabolic, Pathologic Etiology, and Management

Acute occlusion of the abdominal aorta is a catastrophic occurrence that results in high risk of limb loss and death. The etiology has historically been either acute embolism obstructing the aortic bifurcation in 8% to 75% of patients, or thrombosis of existing aorta-iliac occlusive disease in 35% to 84% of patients. Other etiologies include thrombosis of either a previously placed endograft or aortic graft or acute dissection. The most common symptoms are severe pain in almost 100% of patients or lower extremity paralysis/paresis in up to 80% of patients. Evaluation in the past was by angiography, but presently, computed tomography angiography is the preferred imaging study. Treatment is dependent on the etiology and includes embolectomy, aorta femoral bypass, axillary femoral bypass, and endovascular techniques. The aim of intervention is to restore flow in the shortest time period. Mortality rates vary widely from 17% to 52%, amputation occurs in up to 30% of patients. Paraplegia can occur in 40% of patients, renal insufficiency in 40% to 70%, and visceral ischemia in 6% to 14%. Both mortality and morbidity are affected by the duration of ischemia and the local and systemic complications of reperfusion injury. Complications of acute aortic occlusion can be reduced by a more prompt diagnosis, rapid intervention, and a more rapid and complete reestablishment of perfusion.

Type A aortic dissection complicated by malperfusion syndrome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Malperfusion is present in up to 40% of acute type A aortic dissections (ATAADs) and results in increased morbidity and mortality. This review presents different management strategies in patients with ATAAD and malperfusion to improve outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

While the ideal management strategy of ATAAD complicated by malperfusion has yet to be determined, the literature provides evidence for additional techniques to be used in conjunction with central aortic repair to reduce mortality.

SUMMARY

Recent findings support a role for initial reperfusion and delayed central aortic repair, although optimal management strategy remains debated.

The Penn Classification Predicts Hospital Mortality in Acute Stanford Type A and Type B Aortic Dissections

OBJECTIVES

Mortality in acute aortic dissection varies depending on anatomic location, extent, and associated complications. The Stanford classification guides surgical versus medical management. The Penn classification stratifies mortality risk in patients with Stanford type A aortic dissections undergoing surgery. The objective of the present study was to determine whether the Penn classification can predict hospital mortality in patients with acute Stanford type A and type B aortic dissections undergoing surgical or medical management.

DESIGN

Retrospective, observational study.

SETTING

Tertiary care, university hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with acute aortic dissection between January 2008 and December 2017.

INTERVENTIONS

Examination of hospital mortality after surgical or medical management.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Three hundred fifty-two patients had confirmed dissections (186 type A, 166 type B). The overall mortality was 18.8% for type A and 13.3% for type B. Penn class A patients with type A or type B dissections undergoing surgical repair had the lowest mortality (both 3.1%). Penn class B, C, or B+C patients with type A dissections and Penn class B+C patients with type B dissections undergoing medical management had the greatest incidence of mortality (50.0%-57.1%). All others had intermediate mortality (6.7%-39.3%). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that Penn class B, C, and B+C patients had a greater odds of mortality and predicted mortality than did Penn class A patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The Penn classification predicts hospital mortality in patients with acute Stanford type A or type B aortic dissections undergoing surgical or medical management. Early endovascular repair may confer lower risk of mortality in patients with type B dissections presenting without ischemia.