Key result
Limited aortic index repair shows no higher risk of late aortic reoperation versus extended repair.
Why the study?
The optimal management strategy for acute type A aortic dissection is controversial, particularly whether limited primary repair increases late aortic reintervention.
Does limited aortic index repair compared to extended repair affect in-hospital mortality and the incidence of late aortic reoperation in adult patients with acute type A aortic dissection?
Cohort (n=393)
No
Does limited aortic index repair compared to extended repair affect in-hospital mortality and the incidence of late aortic reoperation in adult patients with acute type A aortic dissection?
p-value: p=0.9
Limited initial repair for acute type A aortic dissection does not significantly increase the need for late aortic reoperation compared to extended repair, suggesting extended prophylactic repair may not be necessary and could increase risk by prolonging cross-clamp time.
BACKGROUND: The optimal management strategy for acute aortic type A dissection remains controversial. Whether a limited primary (index) repair would increase the need for late aortic reintervention is still an open debate. METHODS: A total of 393 consecutive adult patients with acute type A aortic dissection who underwent cardiac surgery were analyzed. Our research hypothesis was whether limited aortic index repair (i.e., isolated aorta ascending replacement without an open distal anastomosis with and without a concomitant aortic valve replacement, including hemiarch replacement procedure) is associated with a higher incidence of late aortic reoperation compared with extended repair (i.e., any other surgical procedure that goes beyond that limited approach). RESULTS: Type of the initial repair had no statically significant relationship with in-hospital mortality with a P-value of 0.12, however in multivariable analysis, cross-clamp time had a statistically significant relation with mortality (P = 0.4). From the patients who survived until discharge (N = 311), 40 patients needed a reoperation on the aorta; the mean interval until reoperation was 4.5 years. The relationship between the type of the initial repair and the need for reoperation didn't reach a statically significant value (P = 0.9). In-hospitable mortality after the second operation was 10% (N = 4). CONCLUSION: We reached two conclusions. 1) An extended prophylactic repair in the initial operation of an acute type A aortic dissection might not lead to a lower incidence of reoperations on the aorta and could increase in-hospital mortality by increasing cross-clamp time, and 2) Reoperation on the aorta could be done safely with acceptable mortality outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Elbayomi et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Acute type A aortic dissection (n=393). Limited aortic index repair vs. Extended repair was evaluated on Late aortic reoperation (p=0.9). Limited aortic index repair was not associated with a significantly higher incidence of late aortic reoperation compared to extended repair (P=0.9).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: