Aortic Arch Management During Acute and Subacute Type A Aortic Syndromes.

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of no arch intervention, hemiarch replacement, and total arch replacement during type A aortic syndromes in a contemporary series.

METHODS

From 2004 to 2019, 634 patients have required acute type A dissection repair; these patients were divided into three groups based on type of arch intervention performed: no arch (n = 130), hemiarch (n = 397), and total arch (n = 107). The primary endpoint was mortality; a multivariable risk factor analysis was performed. Secondary endpoints were reoperation and early and late complications.

RESULTS

Operative age was 55 ± 14 years for the cohort and was similar between groups (P = .34). The incidence of peripheral artery disease, heart failure, and prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery differed between the groups (P < .05). Median cardiopulmonary bypass time, aortic cross-clamp time, and length of stay were longest for the total arch group (P < .0001). Early mortality was 20%, 10%, and 10% for the no-arch, hemiarch, and total arch groups, respectively (P = .01). Ten-year survival was 54%, 66%, and 65% for the no-arch, hemiarch, and total arch groups, respectively (P = .01). There was no difference in incidence or timing of redo aortic interventions (P > .05). For the entire cohort, risk factors for late mortality included preoperative peripheral artery disease (hazard ratio 2.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.2 to 4.4; P = .009) and preoperative dialysis (hazard ratio 2.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.3 to 6.1; P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite longer cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross-clamp times, arch intervention was not associated with worse operative or long-term outcome in this series. Patients with peripheral vascular disease and preoperative renal failure remain at highest risk for mortality after type A aortic dissection repair.