Key result
Total arch replacement significantly reduced the risk of open distal reintervention in multivariate analysis (HR 0.056, P=0.011), while root replacement reduced any reintervention univariately.
Why the study?
To evaluate how different approaches for root and arch management during initial surgery for acute type A aortic dissection impact long-term freedom from reintervention, particularly distal reintervention.
Does root and total arch replacement reduce the risk of reintervention in patients undergoing surgery for acute type A aortic dissection?
Cohort (n=164)
Does root and total arch replacement reduce the risk of reintervention in patients undergoing surgery for acute type A aortic dissection?
In patients with acute type A aortic dissection, total arch replacement during the initial surgery significantly reduces the long-term risk of open distal reintervention.
Root and total arch replacement may reduce distal reintervention burden after acute type A dissection; leaves open optimal initial strategy pending prospective data.
Objective This study aimed to evaluate how different approaches for root and arch management during the first surgery for acute type A aortic dissection impact long-term freedom from reintervention, particularly distal reintervention. Methods This is a retrospective cohort study analyzing 164 patients who underwent acute type A aortic dissection surgery from January 2009 to April 2024. Patients were stratified into root replacement (n = 75) and non-root replacement (n = 89) groups. The root replacement group was further stratified by arch intervention type. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression models were performed to assess the impact of root and arch interventions on freedom from reinterventions. Results Root replacement significantly reduced the risk of any reintervention (hazard ratio, 0.496, P = .032) and open distal reintervention (hazard ratio, 0.307, P = .037) in univariate analyses, but not in multivariate analysis. Total arch replacement significantly reduced the risk of open distal reintervention (hazard ratio, 0.056, P = .011) in multivariate analysis. Patients undergoing combined root and total arch replacement demonstrated 100% 5-year freedom from open distal reintervention, compared with 82% for combined root and hemiarch replacement and 76% for non-root replacement, although only a trend was observed (p logrank = .060). Conclusions Root and total arch replacements in acute type A aortic dissection demonstrated reduced risk of reinterventions, particularly open reintervention distal to the arch. More aggressive approaches have the potential to reduce the burden and cost of subsequent operations and improve long-term outcomes. However, although root and total arch replacements offer excellent long-term benefits, they are more complex with potentially higher perioperative risks. The decision to pursue more aggressive interventions should be based on a comprehensive patient assessment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wu et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Acute type A aortic dissection (n=164). Root and total arch replacement vs. Non-root replacement was evaluated on Open distal reintervention (HR 0.056, p=.011). Total arch replacement significantly reduced the risk of open distal reintervention in multivariate analysis (HR 0.056, P=0.011), while root replacement reduced any reintervention univariately.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: