Search

Objectives: In the last decades, 4 different scores for the prediction of mortality following surgery for type A acute aortic dissection (TAAD) were proposed. We aimed to validate these scores in a large external multicentre cohort., Methods: We retrospectively analysed patients who underwent surgery for TAAD between 2000 and 2020. Patients were enrolled from 10 centres from 2 European countries. Outcomes were the early (30-day and/or in-hospital) and 1-year mortality. Discrimination, calibration and observed/expected (O/E) ratio were evaluated., Results: A total of 1895 patients (31.7% females, mean age 63.72 ± 12.8 years) were included in the study. Thirty-day mortality and in-hospital mortality were 21.7% (n = 412) and 22.5% (n = 427) respectively. The German Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection Type A (GERAADA) score shows to have the best discrimination [area under the curve (AUC) 0.671 and 0.672] in predicting as well the early and the 1-year mortality, followed by the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) model 1 (AUC 0.658 and 0.672), the Centofanti (AUC 0.645 and 0.66) and the UK aortic score (AUC 0.549 and 0.563). According to Hosmer-Lemeshow and Brier tests, the IRAD model I and GERAADA, respectively, were well calibrated for the early mortality, while the GERAADA and Centofanti for the 1-year mortality. The O/E analysis showed a marked underestimation for patients labelled as low-risk for UK aortic score and IRAD model I for both outcomes., Conclusions: The GERAADA score showed the best performance in comparison with other scores. However, none of them achieved together a fair discrimination and a good calibration for predicting either the early or the 1-year mortality., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of aortic valve replacement with the sutureless Perceval S aortic valve bioprosthesis (Sorin Biomedica Cardio Srl, Saluggia, Italy)., Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of 314 patients (mean age, 77.9 ± 5.0 years, mean European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II, 9.0% ± 7.6%) who underwent aortic valve replacement with the Perceval S valve with (94 patients) or without (220 patients) concomitant coronary artery bypass surgery at 5 European centers., Results: The Perceval S valve was successfully implanted in all but 1 patient (99.7%). The mean aortic crossclamping time was 43 ± 20 minutes (isolated procedure, 39 ± 15 minutes; concomitant coronary surgery, 52 ± 26 minutes). Severe paravalvular leak occurred in 2 patients (0.6%). In-hospital mortality was 3.2% (1.4% after isolated procedure and 7.4% after concomitant coronary surgery). In-hospital mortality was 2.8% and 4.0% among patients with a European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II less than 10% and 10% or greater, respectively (P = .558). Octogenarians had slightly higher in-hospital mortality (5.2% vs 2.0%, P = .125; after isolated procedure: 2.7% vs 0.7%, P = .223; after concomitant coronary surgery: 9.5% vs 5.8%, P = .491) compared with younger patients. Full sternotomy did not increase the in-hospital mortality risk compared with ministernotomy or minithoracotomy access (1.3% vs 1.4%, when adjusted for baseline covariates: P = .921; odds ratio, 0.886; 95% confidence interval, 0.064-12.346). One-year survival was 90.5%. Freedom from valve-related mortality, stroke, endocarditis, and reoperation was 99.0%, 98.1%, 99.2%, and 98.3%, respectively., Conclusions: The sutureless Perceval S valve is associated with excellent early survival in high-risk patients, particularly among those undergoing an isolated procedure. Further studies are needed to prove the durability of this bioprosthesis., (Copyright © 2014 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)