Bilateral Axillary Artery Perfusion in Total Arch Replacement

BACKGROUND

The site of arterial cannulation is an important consideration in the prevention of cerebral infarction after total arch replacement. We compared the outcomes of cannulation of the bilateral axillary artery, the femoral artery, and central cannulation in total arch replacement.

METHODS

Enrolled were 242 patients, categorized into three groups according to the arterial cannulation site used: bilateral axillary artery group, 124 patients; femoral artery group, 88 patients; central cannulation group, 30 patients. Selective cerebral perfusion was used for brain protection in all patients. Surgical outcomes, including the incidence of postoperative cerebral infarction, were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

Cardiopulmonary bypass time and lower-body circulatory arrest time were significantly shorter in the bilateral axillary artery group. Frozen elephant trunk procedure was performed in 54% of the bilateral axillary artery group (P < .001), and concomitant coronary artery bypass graft surgery was performed in 40% of the central cannulation group (P < .01). Hospital mortality in the bilateral axillary artery group was 1.6%, compared with 1.1% in the femoral artery group, and 0% in the central cannulation group (P = .72). The incidence of permanent neurologic deficit was significantly lower in the bilateral axillary artery group (0.8%) than in the central cannulation group (13%; P = .02). Logistic regression analysis indicated that bilateral axillary artery perfusion was a significant factor in the prevention of permanent neurologic deficit (odds ratio 0.10, P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

Recent technical advances using bilateral axillary artery perfusion and frozen elephant trunk technique were associated with shortening cardiopulmonary bypass time and prevention of postoperative cerebral infarction in total arch replacement.

Concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting during surgical repair of acute type A aortic dissection affects operative mortality rather than midterm mortality

BACKGROUND

In this study, we investigated the impact of concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) on operative and midterm mortality in patients with acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) undergoing surgical repair.

METHODS

From January 2012 to December 2014, among 489 patients (mean age: 47.6 ± 10.4 years, 77.1% male) with ATAAD who received surgical repair at our institute, 21 patients (4.3%) underwent concomitant CABG. Isolated aortic repair was performed in the remaining 468 cases (95.7%). Coronary dissection was indicated in 15 patients (Neri classification type B in 2, type C in 13), concomitant coronary artery disease in five and coronary artery compression in one. The follow-up time was 97.3% at 44.1 ± 13.9 months.

RESULTS

A total of 44 patients (9%) died from surgery, and operative mortality in the concomitant CABG group was significantly higher than that in the isolated aortic repair group (47.6%, 10/21 vs. 7.3%, 34/468; P < 0.001). Among the 11 survivors in the concomitant CABG group, no deaths occurred during the follow-up. Cox regression indicated that concomitant CABG increased the operative mortality risk by 9.2 times (HR, 9.26; 95% CI, 4.31-19.89; P < 0.001). Although it predicted a 5.2-fold increase in overall mortality (HR, 5.20; 95% CI, 2.55-10.61; P < 0.001), concomitant CABG did not affect midterm death (P = 0.996).

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant CABG carries a significant operative risk in ATAAD patients undergoing surgical repair. However, survivors may benefit from concomitant CABG and had similar midterm mortality compared with the other cases.

Propensity score analysis in patients with and without previous isolated coronary artery bypass grafting who require proximal aortic and arch surgery

OBJECTIVE

The risk posed by previous isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients who require proximal aortic or aortic arch surgery is unclear. We compared outcomes of ascending aortic and arch procedures in patients with and without previous CABG.

METHODS

Using propensity scores, we created 2 matched groups of patients who underwent proximal aortic surgery, including total arch repairs, at our institution: 126 patients who underwent isolated CABG before the index operation and 126 without previous CABG. Forty-four percent of aortic operations were emergency procedures. Eighty-six patients had a patent previous left internal mammary graft. We compared outcomes between the 2 groups and calculated Kaplan-Meier survival curves.

RESULTS

The following outcomes were recorded for the patients with previous isolated CABG versus no CABG: operative mortality, 15.9% versus 11.1% (P = .3); 30-day mortality, 13.5% versus 7.1% (P = .1); persistent stroke, 6.3% versus 4.8% (P = .6); and renal failure necessitating hemodialysis at discharge, 7.9% versus 4.0% (P = .2). Previous CABG did not independently predict any adverse outcome, even though patients who underwent previous CABG more frequently needed intra-aortic balloon support (P < .01). The P value for the overall intergroup difference in long-term survival was .06.

CONCLUSIONS

This is one of the largest studies yet reported to examine the impact of previous isolated CABG on proximal aortic or arch surgery outcomes. Although these results may be specific to aortic centers of excellence, in this complicated patient cohort, previous isolated CABG did not independently predict any adverse outcome. These results could serve as a benchmark for assessing future endovascular therapies.

Surgical outcome of elective total arch replacement with coronary artery bypass grafting

Purpose

We aimed to compare the surgical outcome between total arch replacement with coronary bypass surgery and that without.

Methods

Between 2008 and 2016, 157 consecutive patients underwent total arch replacement with antegrade cerebral perfusion and moderate hypothermic circulatory arrest using the proximal first approach. They were divided into two groups: total arch replacement with coronary bypass surgery (group 1, n = 38) and that without (group 2, n = 119).

Results

Of the 38 patients in group 1, 37 (97%) were asymptomatic. The left internal thoracic artery and saphenous vein were used in one (2.6%) and 38 (100%) patients, respectively. The mean number of coronary anastomoses was 1.5 ± 1.0. In-hospital mortality rate was 3.8%. Cardiopulmonary bypass time and operation time in group 1 were significantly longer than those in group 2 (336 ± 52 min vs. 276 ± 38 min, P < 0.0001 and 702 ± 122 min vs. 619 ± 94 min, P < 0.0001, respectively). No differences in in-hospital mortality and perioperative myocardial infarction were found between the groups (5.3% vs. 3.4%, P = 0.633 and 0% vs. 1.7%, P = 1.000, respectively). In the multivariate analysis, age (odds ratio, 1.208; 95% confidence interval, 1.041-1.497; P = 0.008) and cardiopulmonary bypass time (odds ratio, 1.019; 95% confidence interval, 1.001-1.041; P = 0.041) were significant determinants of in-hospital mortality.

Conclusions

Although prolonged cardiopulmonary bypass time was a significant determinant of in-hospital mortality, total arch replacement with coronary bypass surgery could be safely performed with favorable outcomes.

An evaluation of the long-term patency of the aortocoronary bypass graft anastomosed to a vascular prosthesis

OBJECTIVES

Although concomitant surgery for coronary artery disease (CAD) and thoracic aortic aneurysm is performed often, the long-term patency of the coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) anastomosed to a vascular prosthesis has not been fully investigated. Here, we explored the long-term patency of the graft in comparison with the proximal anastomosis site on the native ascending aorta or vascular prosthesis.

METHODS

A total of 84 patients with concomitant CABG who underwent surgery for thoracic aortic aneurysm at 3 Osaka Cardiovascular Research Group institutes were retrospectively investigated for this study. The patency of 109 aortocoronary bypasses using saphenous vein grafts was evaluated with computed tomography angiography or coronary angiography, comparing the grafts anastomosed on the vascular prosthesis (group P, n = 75) to those anastomosed on the native ascending aorta (group N, n = 34).

RESULTS

During 45.9 ± 39.7 months follow-up, significantly worse patency of the grafts in group P was revealed when compared with those in group N (100% vs 77.6% in 12 months, 100% vs 52.7% in 36 months and 100% vs 31.6% in 57 months, log rank P < 0.001). The poor patency of the grafts was confirmed in each target lesions (left anterior descending artery: P = 0.050, right coronary artery: P = 0.045, left circumflex artery: P = 0.051) and regardless of the severities of the target coronary vessels (severe stenosis: P = 0.013, mild-to-moderate stenosis: P = 0.029). Furthermore, an analysis of graft occlusion risk factors using the univariate Cox proportional hazards model revealed that the proximal anastomosis site on the vascular prosthesis was the sole risk factor for graft occlusion (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In the simultaneous surgery for CAD and thoracic aortic aneurysm, CABG design from vascular prosthesis to coronary artery should be avoided if possible, although further studies are warranted.

Outcomes of Concomitant Total Aortic Arch Replacement with Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

OBJECTIVE

Total aortic arch replacement is a highly invasive procedure. Here, we have investigated patient outcomes following total aortic arch replacement with or without coronary artery bypass grafting.

METHODS

One hundred and eighty-one patients underwent total aortic arch replacement without coronary artery bypass grafting, and 65 underwent with coronary artery bypass grafting. We compared preoperative, operative, and postoperative factors and analyzed survival outcomes. We used univariate and multivariate analyses to determine factors associated with long-term mortality.

RESULTS

Cardiopulmonary bypass and surgical times were significantly longer in the concomitant total aortic arch replacement with coronary artery bypass grafting group. Hospital mortality was 3.3% in the total aortic arch replacement group and 7.7% in the concomitant total aortic arch replacement with coronary artery bypass grafting group. Perioperative myocardial infarction was not seen in either group. There were no significant differences in mortality between the groups. Multivariate analysis revealed preoperative age, ischemic heart disease, and estimated glemerular filtration rate (eGFR) as risk factors affecting long-term mortality, whereas concomitant total aortic arch replacement with coronary artery bypass grafting was not a risk factor.

CONCLUSION

Although patients' backgrounds should be considered, total aortic arch replacement can be concomitantly performed with coronary artery bypass grafting surgery without additional mortality risk.