Vol 74, No 9 (2016)
Original articles
Published online: 2016-04-01

open access

Page views 1013
Article views/downloads 998
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Single-centre experience in surgery of acute aortic type A dissection and true aortic arch aneurysm

Tomasz Hirnle, Adrian Stankiewicz, Krzysztof Matlak, Marek Frank, Robert Trzciński, Anna Lejko, Arkadiusz Niedźwiecki, Maciej Mitrosz, Iwona Dmitruk, Marta Milewska-Buzun, Grzegorz Hirnle
Kardiol Pol 2016;74(9):994-1001.

Abstract

Background: Surgery of the aortic arch is challenging.

Aim: To assess the results of aortic arch surgery.

Methods: Analysis of 172 patients operated on arch dissection (emergency group: 97 patients) or aneurysm (elective group: 75 patients) between 2007 and 2014. Arch surgery was defined as a procedure requiring circumferential anastomosis at the level of the aortic arch or the descending aorta with the use of techniques of brain protection (deep hypothermic circulatory arrest [DHCA] or selective antegrade cerebral perfusion [SACP]) and/or debranching of at least one supra-aortic vessel.

Results: Men predominated in both groups (> 70%). Men were younger in the emergency group (55 vs. 66 years; p < 0.008). The operative risk was higher in the emergency group (19.2% vs. 12.5%; p < 0.001). Forty-nine per cent of the patients from the emergency group and 5% from the elective group were operated with antiplatelet therapy (p < 0.001). Extended hemiarch procedure was performed in 79% (n = 77) in the emergency and 76% (n = 57) in the elective group. Total arch replacement was performed in 19 (21%) patients from the emergency and 18 (24%) patients from the elective group. In these patients debranching was performed in 68% of the emergency patients group and in 67% of the elective group. Elephant trunk procedure (classic/frozen) was performed in 53% (n = 10) from the emergency and in 78% (n = 14) of patients from the elective group. Aortic valve sparing surgery was performed in 20% of patients from the emergency and 9% from the elective group (p = 0.063). DHCA was performed in 58% (n = 43) of patients from the elective group and 39% (n = 37) from the emergency group. SACP was performed in 61% (n = 58) of patients from the emergency and 42% (n = 31) from the elective group. Thirty-day mortality in the emergency group reached 33% (n = 32), and in the elective group 15% (n = 11; p = 0.007). In multivariate analysis, predictors of death in the emergency group were: Logistic EuroSCORE above 19.5%, extracorporeal circulation time above 228 min, and postoperative acute renal failure (ARF); and in the elective group: DHCA time above 26 min, rethoracotomy due to bleeding, and ARF. Follow-up was completed in 100% of patients in terms of vital status. The mean follow-up time of the patients from the emergency group was 24.3 ± 27.10 (min 0, max 92) months, and from the elective group 30.3 ± 24.5 (min 0, max 99) months. During the follow-up period all-cause mortality in the emergency group was 43% (n = 42/97), and in the elective group it was 36% (n = 27/75).

Conclusions: Early mortality in the emergency group was higher, while long-term mortality did not differ among the groups. Postoperative ARF is a critical predictor of mortality in both groups.  




Polish Heart Journal (Kardiologia Polska)