Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University, School of Medicine, Stanford, Calif; Division of Health Research and Policy, Stanford University, School of Medicine, Stanford, Calif.
Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University, School of Medicine, Stanford, Calif.
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2018 Jan;155(1):1-7.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2017.08.137. Epub 2017 Sep 19.
Management of the aortic root is a challenge for surgeons treating acute type A aortic dissection.
We performed a retrospective review of the acute type A aortic dissection experience at Stanford Hospital between 2005 and 2015 and identified patients who underwent either limited root repair or aortic root replacement. Differences in baseline characteristics were balanced with inverse probability weighting to estimate the average treatment effect on the controls. Weighted logistic regression was used to evaluate in-hospital mortality. Weighted Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate differences in the hazard for mid-term death. Reoperation was evaluated with death as a competing risk with the Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard.
After we excluded patients managed either nonoperatively or with definitive endovascular repair, there were 293 patients without connective tissue disease who underwent either limited root repair or aortic root replacement. There was no difference in weighted perioperative mortality, odds ratio 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-1.76, P = .7), and there was no difference in weighted survival, hazard ratio 1.12 (95% CI, 0.54-2.31, P = .8). Risk of reoperation was greater in limited root repair (11.8%, 95% CI, 0.0%-23.8%) than for root replacement (0%), P < .001.
Limited root repair was associated with increased risk of late reoperation after repair of acute type A aortic dissection. Surgeons with adequate experience may consider aortic root replacement in well-selected patients. However, given good outcomes after limited root repair, surgeons should not feel compelled to perform this more-complex operation.
急性 A 型主动脉夹层的外科治疗对主动脉根部的处理是一个挑战。
我们对斯坦福医院 2005 年至 2015 年间急性 A 型主动脉夹层的经验进行了回顾性分析,并确定了接受有限根部修复或主动脉根部置换的患者。采用逆概率加权法平衡基线特征差异,以估计对照组的平均处理效果。采用加权逻辑回归评估院内死亡率。采用加权 Cox 比例风险回归评估中期死亡风险的差异。采用 Fine-Gray 亚分布风险评估再手术的差异,以死亡为竞争风险。
排除非手术治疗或确定性血管内修复的患者后,我们共纳入了 293 例无结缔组织疾病的患者,他们接受了有限根部修复或主动脉根部置换。加权围手术期死亡率无差异,比值比为 0.89(95%置信区间,0.44-1.76,P=0.7),加权生存率也无差异,风险比为 1.12(95%置信区间,0.54-2.31,P=0.8)。有限根部修复的再手术风险较高(11.8%,95%置信区间,0.0%-23.8%),而根部置换的风险为 0%,P<0.001。
急性 A 型主动脉夹层修复后,有限根部修复与晚期再手术风险增加相关。有足够经验的外科医生可能会考虑在精选患者中进行主动脉根部置换。然而,鉴于有限根部修复后的良好结果,外科医生不应感到必须进行更复杂的手术。