Hemiarch versus extended arch repair for acute type A dissection: results from a multicenter national registry
M Elbatarny, LM Stevens, F Dagenais… - The Journal of Thoracic …, 2024 - Elsevier
The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2024•Elsevier
Objective We compared perioperative outcomes of patients with acute type A aortic
dissection undergoing hemiarch (HA) versus extended arch (EA) repair with or without
descending aortic intervention. Methods Nine hundred twenty-nine patients underwent
acute type A aortic dissection repair (2002-2021, 9 centers) including open distal repair (HA)
with or without additional EA repair. EA with intervention on the descending aorta (EAD)
included elephant trunk, antegrade thoracic endovascular aortic replacement, or uncovered …
dissection undergoing hemiarch (HA) versus extended arch (EA) repair with or without
descending aortic intervention. Methods Nine hundred twenty-nine patients underwent
acute type A aortic dissection repair (2002-2021, 9 centers) including open distal repair (HA)
with or without additional EA repair. EA with intervention on the descending aorta (EAD)
included elephant trunk, antegrade thoracic endovascular aortic replacement, or uncovered …
Objective
We compared perioperative outcomes of patients with acute type A aortic dissection undergoing hemiarch (HA) versus extended arch (EA) repair with or without descending aortic intervention.
Methods
Nine hundred twenty-nine patients underwent acute type A aortic dissection repair (2002-2021, 9 centers) including open distal repair (HA) with or without additional EA repair. EA with intervention on the descending aorta (EAD) included elephant trunk, antegrade thoracic endovascular aortic replacement, or uncovered dissection stent. EA with no descending intervention (EAND), included unstented suture-only methods. Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, permanent neurologic deficit, computed tomography malperfusion resolution, and a composite. Multivariable logistic regression was also performed.
Results
Mean age was 66 ± 18 years, 30% (278 out of 929) were women, and HA was performed more frequently (75% [n = 695]) than EA (25% [n = 234]). EAD techniques included: dissection stent (39 out of 234 [17%]), thoracic endovascular aortic replacement (18 out of 234 [7.7%]), and elephant trunk (87 out of 234 [37%]). In-hospital mortality (EA: n = 49 [21%] and HA: n = 129 [19%]; P = .42), and neurological deficit (EA: n = 43 [18%] and HA: n = 121 [17%]; P = .74) were similar. EA was not independently associated with death (EA vs HA odds ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.77-1.54; P = .63) or neurologic deficit (EA vs HA odds ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.47-1.55; P = .59). Composite adverse events differed significantly (EA vs HA odds ratio, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.16-1.87; P = .001). Malperfusion resolved more frequently after EAD (EAD: n = 32 [80%], EAND: n = 18 [56%], HA: n = 71 [50%]; P = .004), although multivariable analysis was not significant (EAD vs HA odds ratio, 2.17; 95% CI, 0.83-5.66; P = .10).
Conclusions
Extended arch interventions pose similar perioperative mortality and neurologic risks as Hemiarch. Descending aortic reinforcement may promote malperfusion restoration. Extended techniques should be approached with caution in acute dissection due to increased risk of adverse events.
Elsevier