Key result
Mechanical Bentall shows no survival benefit over bioprosthetic in young type A dissection alongside higher complications.
Why the study?
Valve selection in acute type A aortic dissection requiring aortic root replacement is challenging, and long-term outcomes of mechanical versus bioprosthetic replacement in young patients were needed.
Does mechanical Bentall compared to bioprosthetic Bentall improve 10-year survival in young patients (≤65 years) with acute type A aortic dissection?
Cohort
No
Does mechanical Bentall compared to bioprosthetic Bentall improve 10-year survival in young patients (≤65 years) with acute type A aortic dissection?
In young patients (≤65 years) with acute type A aortic dissection, bioprosthetic aortic root replacement offers similar 10-year survival to mechanical replacement but with fewer morbid complications.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Bioprosthetic Bentall may reduce morbid complications without survival loss in young ATAAD; leaves open need for randomized confirmation before practice change.
Objective: Valve selection in acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) requiring aortic root replacement is challenging given the clinical acuity, unknown patient preferences, risk of surgical bleeding, and limited life expectancy. We sought to identify long-term outcomes of mechanical versus bioprosthetic aortic root replacement in young patients with ATAAD. Methods: Retrospective review of our institution's database of ATAAD was conducted to identify patients aged 65 years and younger who underwent mechanical Bentall (mech-Bentall) or bioprosthetic Bentall (bio-Bentall) for ATAAD from 2002 to 2022. The primary end point was 10-year survival, which was compared in a propensity score-matched cohort and multivariable Cox proportional hazards model. A composite outcome of 10-year freedom from death, stroke, major bleeding, and valvular reintervention was assessed as a secondary end point. Conclusions: There is no survival advantage of mech-Bentall in ATAAD in young patients at 10 years, and it is associated with a significantly higher rate of morbid complications. When the aortic valve cannot be spared, bio-Bentall should be considered in ATAAD, even in young patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Catalano et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD). Mechanical Bentall vs. Bioprosthetic Bentall was evaluated on 10-year survival. Mechanical Bentall showed no 10-year survival advantage over bioprosthetic Bentall in young patients with acute type A aortic dissection and had higher rates of morbid complications.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: