Key result
Total arch replacement with the frozen elephant trunk technique increased 3-year freedom from aorta-related events compared to ascending aortic replacement.
Why the study?
Ascending aortic replacement treats acute type A dissection but can leave a residual dissected aorta, whereas total arch replacement with frozen elephant trunk may obliterate the false lumen without increasing operative risk.
Does total arch replacement with the frozen elephant trunk technique reduce midterm aorta-related events and mortality compared to ascending aortic replacement in patients with acute DeBakey type I aortic dissection?
Cohort (n=143)
No
Does total arch replacement with the frozen elephant trunk technique reduce midterm aorta-related events and mortality compared to ascending aortic replacement in patients with acute DeBakey type I aortic dissection?
In patients with acute DeBakey type I aortic dissection, total arch replacement with the frozen elephant trunk technique significantly reduced midterm aorta-related events compared to ascending aortic replacement, without increasing mortality or perioperative complications.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support total arch replacement with FET in acute DeBakey I dissection; leaves open randomized confirmation of benefits.
Background Acute type A aortic dissection is treated with an emergency procedure that uses ascending aortic replacement (AAR). However, to avoid a residual dissected aorta with a false lumen, total arch replacement (TAR) is required. The frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique is a promising surgical approach that promotes false lumen obliteration in a single step without increasing operative risk. Therefore, this retrospective single-center study aimed to evaluate the operative outcomes of AAR and TAR with FET. Methods Between 2007 and 2021, 143 patients with acute DeBakey type Ⅰ aortic dissection underwent a central repair using AAR (n = 95) or TAR with FET (n = 43). All perioperative variables, the duration of all-cause mortality, and aortic events defined as dilatation of the distal aorta > 5 cm, new occurrences of aortic dissection, distal aortic surgery, and distal aortic rupture were recorded. We compared these patients' perioperative variables and mid-term results with an additional focus on distal aortic events. Results Patient background data did not differ between the two groups. Perioperative results for the TAR with FET group vs the AAR group showed similar operative times (306 vs 298 min, P = 0.862), but the TAR group had longer cardiopulmonary bypass times (154 vs 179 min, P < 0.001). The freedom from all-cause death for the TAR vs AAR groups using the Kaplan-Meier method was 81.9% vs 85.4% and 78.0% vs 85.4% (P = 0.407) at 1 and 3 years, respectively, and freedom from aorta-related events was 90.6% vs 97.6% and 69.3% vs 87.0% (P = 0.034) at 1 and 3 years, respectively. Conclusions TAR with FET had comparable perioperative results to AAR in acute DeBakey type Ⅰ aortic dissection and was considered a valuable method to avoid aorta-related events in the midterm.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Takagi et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Acute DeBakey type I aortic dissection (n=143). Total arch replacement with frozen elephant trunk technique vs. Ascending aortic replacement was evaluated on Freedom from aorta-related events at 3 years (p=0.034). Total arch replacement with the frozen elephant trunk technique significantly increased 3-year freedom from aorta-related events compared to ascending aortic replacement (87.0% vs 69.3%, P=0.034).
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: