Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Analysis predicts mid-term outcomes in patients post frozen elephant trunk surgery, suggesting timely interventions.
OBJECTIVES To determine whether computed tomography (CT) within 6 months after total arch replacement with a frozen elephant trunk (FET) for chronic aortic dissection predicts mid-term outcomes and informs the timing of distal treatment. METHODS We analyzed 56 consecutive patients who underwent total arch replacement with FET at two centers (2009–2022) and had evaluable 6-month postoperative CT. Early remodelling was defined as the change from baseline to 6 months in the maximal outer-to-outer diameter of the proximal descending thoracic aorta at Level A (Ishimaru zone 3, 20 mm distal to the left subclavian artery, measured on centerline-orthogonal reconstructions). Patients were classified as early positive remodelling (EPR; no increase or a decrease) or early negative remodelling (ENR; ≥1-mm increase). Prespecified outcomes were distal aortic reintervention, distal stent graft–induced new entry (dSINE), and overall survival. RESULTS Mean follow-up was 5.4 years (standard deviation 3.7). Distal reintervention was required in 36/56 patients (64%). At 5 years, freedom from distal reintervention was higher with EPR than with ENR (44.6% vs 6.2%; p = 0.003). dSINE occurred in 26/56 patients (46.4%); 5-year dSINE-free survival was 65.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 39.6–81.9) with EPR versus 18.2% (95% CI, 5.9–35.2) with ENR (p = 0.008). Overall, 5-year survival for the cohort was 80.0% (95% CI, 64.7–89.2). Among ENR patients, 5-year survival was 0% with conservative management versus 40.5% with distal intervention (p < 0.001); within EPR, 5-year survival was 65.9% with conservative management versus 85.7% with reintervention (p = 0.210). CONCLUSIONS A 6-month CT provides simple, actionable risk stratification after total arch replacement with FET for chronic aortic dissection. Absence of EPR identifies a high-risk subgroup (ENR) that warrants closer surveillance and timely distal intervention, optimizing follow-up intensity and treatment timing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Akita et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: