Key result
Open distal aortic repair with circulatory arrest shows no significant mortality difference versus closed technique.
Why the study?
Does open distal aortic repair using deep hypothermic circulatory arrest compared to a closed technique affect perioperative mortality and morbidity in patients with acute ascending aortic dissection?
Cohort (n=112)
Does open distal aortic repair using deep hypothermic circulatory arrest compared to a closed technique affect perioperative mortality and morbidity in patients with acute ascending aortic dissection?
Absolute Event Rate: 20.6% vs 11.4%
p-value: p=not significant
Open distal aortic repair with deep hypothermic circulatory arrest for acute ascending aortic dissection showed a non-significant trend toward higher mortality and more cerebral injury compared to the closed technique, likely reflecting more severe baseline anatomical characteristics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Non-significant mortality trend with open repair warrants no technique change; leaves open optimal distal approach in acute aortic dissection.
Kipfer et al. (1995) conducted a cohort in acute ascending aortic dissection (n=112). Open distal aortic repair (using deep hypothermic circulatory arrest) vs. Closed technique (without circulatory arrest) was evaluated on perioperative mortality (p=not significant). Open distal aortic repair with circulatory arrest had a non-significant trend toward higher perioperative mortality (20.6% vs 11.4%) compared to the closed technique without circulatory arrest.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: