Early outcomes of patients with Marfan syndrome and acute aortic type A dissection

Prognostic impact of shock in patients with type A acute aortic syndrome. Results of a nationwide multicenter study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical characteristics, imaging findings, treatment, and prognosis of patients with type A acute aortic syndrome (AAS-A) presenting with shock. To assess the impact of surgery on this patient population.

METHODS

The study included 521 patients with A-AAS enrolled in the Spanish Registry of Acute Aortic Syndrome (RESA-III) from January 2018 to December 2019. The RESA-III is a prospective, multicenter registry that contains AAS data from 30 tertiary-care hospitals. Patients were classified into two groups according to their clinical presentation, with or without shock. Shock was defined as persistent systolic blood pressure <80 mmHg despite adequate volume resuscitation.

RESULTS

97 (18.6%) patients with A-AAS presented with shock. Clinical presentation with syncope was much more common in the Shock group (45.4% vs 10.1%, p = 0.001). Patients in the Shock group had more complications at diagnosis and before surgery: cardiac tamponade (36.2% vs 9%, p < 0.001), acute renal failure (28.9% vs 18.2%, p = 0.018), and need for orotracheal intubation (40% vs 9.1%, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in aortic regurgitation (51.6% vs 46.7%, p = 0.396) between groups. In-hospital mortality was higher among patients with shock (48.5% vs 27.4%, p < 0.001). Surgery was associated with a significant mortality reduction both in patients with and without shock. Surgery had an independent protective effect on mortality (OR 0.03, 95% CI (0.00-0.32)).

CONCLUSION

Patients with AAS-A admitted with shock have a heavily increased risk of mortality. Syncope and pericardial effusion at diagnosis are strongly associated with shock. Surgery was independently associated with a mortality reduction in patients with AAS-A and shock.

Improvement of Early Outcomes in Type A Acute Aortic Syndrome After an Aorta Code Implementation

BACKGROUND

Reduction of variability through process reengineering can improve surgical results for patients with type A acute aortic syndrome. We compare short-term results before and after implementation of an Aorta Code for patients with type A acute aortic syndrome who underwent surgery.

METHODS

The Aorta Code was implemented in a 5-hospital healthcare network in 2019. This critical pathway was based on a simple diagnostic algorithm, ongoing training, immediate patient transfer, and treatment by an expert multidisciplinary team. We retrospectively compared all patients operated on in our center before (2005-2018) and after (January 2019 to February 2023) its implementation.

RESULTS

One hundred two and 70 patients underwent surgery in the precode and code periods, respectively. In the code period the number of patients operated on per year increased (from 7.3 to 16.8), and the median elapsed time until diagnosis (6.5 hours vs 4.2 hours), transfer (4 hours vs 2.2 hours), and operating room (2.7 hours vs 1.8 hours) were significantly shorter (P < .05). Aortic root repair and total arch replacement were more frequent (66.7% vs 82.9% [P = .003] and 20.6% vs 40% [P = .001]). Cardiopulmonary bypass and ischemia times were also shorter (179.7 minutes vs 148.2 minutes [P = .001] and 105 minutes vs 91.2 minutes [P = .022]). Incidence of prolonged mechanical ventilation (53.9% vs 34.3%, P = .011), major stroke (17.7% vs 7.1%, P = .047), and 30-day mortality (27.5% vs 7.1%, P = .001) decreased significantly.

CONCLUSIONS

An Aorta Code can be successfully implemented by using a standardized protocol within a hospital network. The number of cases increased; time to diagnosis, transfer, and operating room were reduced; and 30- day mortality significantly decreased.

Risk factors for long-term mortality after acute aortic dissection-results of the German registry for acute aortic dissection type a long-term follow-up

OBJECTIVES

Several short-term analyses from German Registry for Acute Aortic Dissection Type A (GERAADA) have been published. This study investigated whether short-term risk factors are transferable to the long-term prognosis of patients.

METHODS

Thirty-three centres with 2686 patients participated in the long-term follow-up. A total of 1164 patients died, 1063 survived and 459 were lost to follow-up during the follow-up timeframe (mean duration: 10.2 years). Long-term mortality of the cohort was compared with an age-stratified, German population.

RESULTS

One, 5 and 10 years after initial surgery, the survival of the GERAADA patient cohort was 71.4%, 63.4% and 51%, respectively. Without the early deaths (90-day mortality 25.4%), survival was calculated after 1, 5 and 10 years: 95.6%, 83.5% and 68.3%. Higher age, longer extracorporeal circulation time, shorter perioperative ventilation time and postoperative neurologic deficits were predictive of long-term prognosis. In an age-divided landmark analysis, the mortality of aortic dissection surgery survivors was found to be similar to that of the general German population. If patients are sorted in risk groups according to the GERAADA score, long-term survival differs between the risk groups.

CONCLUSIONS

If patients have survived an acute postoperative period of 90 days, life expectancy comparable to that of the general German population can be assumed in lower- and medium-risk patients. Whether the GERAADA score can provide valuable insights into the long-term prognosis of patients undergoing surgery for acute aortic dissection type A is still unclear.

Histopathological Gap in Aortic Diseases: A Prospective Analysis

Aortic dissection (AD) is a critical cardiovascular condition with the potential for devastating consequences. This study evaluated the histological changes in the aorta wall in patients with AD and aortic aneurysm (AA) who received surgical aortic replacement. Histopathological data showed that modifications of the media layer (p = 0.0197), myxomatous aspect (p = 0.0001), and subendothelial layer degeneration (p = 0.0107) were more frequently seen in AA versus AD samples. Patients with AA were approximately twice as likely to develop histological changes than those with AD (p = 0.0037). Patients with moderate or severe medial degeneration had a higher chance of developing AD (p = 0.0001). Because the histopathological score proved to be a predictor of both in-hospital and overall mortality, its evaluation should become the standard of care in any patients who undergo aortic replacement. Individualized postoperative management might be influenced by the histopathological aspect of the aortic layer.

Treatment of the aortic root in acute aortic dissection type A: insights from the German Registry for Acute Aortic Dissection Type A

OBJECTIVES

Surgery of the aortic root in acute aortic dissection type A (AADA) remains a topic of vague evidence since the extend of dissection and surgeons' capability and interpretation of the disease vary remarkably. We aimed to interpret root operation strategies in the German Registry for Acute Aortic Dissection cohort.

METHODS

German Registry for Acute Aortic Dissection collected the data of 56 centres between July 2006 and June 2015. A total of 3382 patients undergoing operations for AADA were included and divided into 3 groups according to aortic root procedure types: supracommissural replacement (SCR), conduit replacement (CR) and valve sparing root replacement (VSRR).

RESULTS

Patients in SCR (2425, 71.7%) were significantly older than CR (681, 20.1%) and VSRR (276, 8.2%) (63.4 vs 57.5 vs 54.2 years; P < 0.001), more female (38.9% vs 32.0% vs 26.1%; P < 0.001) and presented with less aortic regurgitation (26.3% vs 57.1% vs 56.5%; P < 0.001). VSRR presented with slightly less multiple organ malperfusion (11.6% vs 12.0% vs 10.9%; P = 0.045) and were more often diagnosed for Marfan syndrome (2.4% vs 5.1% vs 9.1%; P < 0.001). Thirty-day mortality was lower for VSRR (11.6%) compared to SCR (16.1%) and CR (19.8%; P = 0.010). Despite longer procedural times, multivariable regression showed no influence of total arch replacement for VSRR on mortality compared to CR (odds ratio 0.264; 95% confidence interval, 0.033-2.117; P = 0.21).

CONCLUSIONS

SCR remains the procedure of choice in elderly and compromised patients. Extended root preservation techniques may be applied even in combination with extended aortic arch surgery for selected patients for AADA with promising early outcomes.