Key result
Aortic root replacement for acute aortic dissection increased early renal failure (9.5% vs 0%, p=0.018) but reduced long-term aortic regurgitation (0% vs 29.7%, p=0.006) versus supracoronary grafts.
Why the study?
Does aortic root replacement improve long-term outcomes compared to supracoronary tube graft in patients with type A acute aortic dissection?
Cohort (n=75)
No
Does aortic root replacement improve long-term outcomes compared to supracoronary tube graft in patients with type A acute aortic dissection?
Absolute Event Rate: 9.5% vs 0%
p-value: p=0.018
In type A acute aortic dissection, root replacement prevents long-term aortic regurgitation compared to supracoronary tube grafts, but requires longer operative times and increases early renal impairment risk, with no difference in overall mortality or reoperation.
Background: Surgical approach to type A acute aortic dissection (AADA) is usually dictated by the presenting anatomy. We compared long-term outcomes of AADA repaired with a root replacement versus a supracoronary tube graft, regardless of the proximal extent of the intimal tear. Methods: A single-centre, retrospective cohort of consecutive patients undergoing repair of AADA between December 1999 and March 2012 were stratified based on the proximal surgical procedure performed: supracoronary tube graft or root replacement. Imaging, chart reviews and clinical follow-ups were analyzed to identify the presenting anatomy and clinical outcomes. Results: We included the cases of 75 patients in our analysis: 54 received a supracoronary tube graft and 21 received a root replacement. The proximal tear was identified below the sinotubular junction in all patients in the root group and in 61% of patients in the supracoronary group. We detected no differences between the groups for in-hospital mortality, length of stay, or complications. However, the root group had significantly increased renal failure (0% v. 9.5%, p = 0.018), cardiopulmonary bypass time (198.4 ± 80.0 min v. 316.5 ± 102.5 min, p < 0.001), cross-clamp time (91.6 ± 34.9 min v. 191.3 ± 52.8 min, p < 0.001), duration of surgery (457.5 ± 129.9 min v. 611.6 ± 197.8 min, p < 0.001), and platelet transfusions (8.1 ± 7.6 v. 12.8 ± 8.7 units, p = 0.021) than the supracoronary group. Long-term follow-up demonstrated a greater incidence of 2+ aortic regurgitation among patients in the supracoronary group than the root group (29.7% v. 0.0%, p = 0.006); however, there was no difference between the groups in symptoms or reoperation. Conclusion: In AADA, aortic root replacement involves a longer procedure with increased risk of early renal impairment. Long-term follow-up identified significantly more aortic regurgitation and root dilation in the supracoronary group than the root group, with a trend toward worse long-term survival. However, we found no difference between the groups in mortality, reoperation or New York Heart Association class.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Valdis et al. (2017) conducted a cohort in type A acute aortic dissection (AADA) (n=75). Root replacement vs. Supracoronary tube graft was evaluated on renal failure (p=0.018). Aortic root replacement for acute aortic dissection increased early renal failure (9.5% vs 0%, p=0.018) but reduced long-term aortic regurgitation (0% vs 29.7%, p=0.006) versus supracoronary grafts.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: