Search

Aim: To evaluate the effects of double (axillary and femoral) vs. single (axillary) cannulation on early outcomes of acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD). Materials & methods: Meta-analysis using PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases through August 23, 2023. Focused on operative mortality, postoperative stroke, re-exploration for bleeding, spinal cord injury, and renal replacement therapy. Results: Among 5 propensity score-matched studies with 2127 patients, double cannulation showed comparable mortality and higher rates of postoperative stroke (pooled odds ratio: 1.69, 95% confidence interval: 1.19–2.39) and need for renal replacement therapy (pooled odds ratio: 1.35, 95% confidence interval: 1.13–1.60) compared with single cannulation. Conclusion: Double arterial cannulation in ATAAD surgery is associated with increased postoperative stroke and renal replacement therapy than single cannulation. We studied the optimal way to maintain blood flow during surgery for acute aortic dissection. We focused on comparing the use of one tube placement site in the axillary artery with two sites, both in the axillary and femoral arteries, in five previous studies. Using two sites was associated with a higher risk of stroke and need for dialysis after surgery than using only one site. Adding a tube in the femoral artery for blood flow may increase the risk of complications. It appears that placing the tube only in the axillary artery may be a safer choice for appropriately selected patients having this surgery. Article highlights Background Acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) remains a formidable challenge with significant mortality and morbidity rates. Optimal perfusion strategy is one of the key components for successful ATAAD repair. Double arterial cannulation, which includes both axillary and femoral cannulation, has been used in various contexts for ATAAD repair to take advantage of each approach. However, conflicting results have been reported regarding the efficacy of double arterial vs. single axillary cannulation in ATAAD repair. Study design Conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the effect of double arterial vs. single axillary cannulation techniques. Identified 5 retrospective propensity score-matched studies from Asia with 2127 patients for analysis. Key findings Operative mortality was comparable between the two groups. Double cannulation was associated with higher postoperative stroke with a pooled odds ratio of 1.69 (95% confidence interval: 1.19–2.39). Double cannulation showed a higher rate of need for postoperative renal replacement therapy with a pooled odds ratio of 1.35 (95% confidence interval: 1.13–1.60). Implications for practice Unnecessary double arterial cannulation during ATAAD repair may lead to worse clinical outcomes, and surgeons should carefully consider the potential risks associated with double arterial cannulation. A need for individualized assessment to determine the most appropriate cannulation strategy for each patient. Emphasis on the need for prospective studies to provide more definitive guidance on the optimal cannulation strategy for ATAAD repair. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research comparing the effectiveness of central aortic cannulation to axillary artery cannulation in repairing acute type A aortic dissection is limited and controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to compare early outcomes of central aortic cannulation versus axillary artery cannulation for surgery for acute aortic dissection type A. Methods: A comprehensive systematic search was conducted across PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to September 1, 2023. The primary endpoints were operative mortality and incidence of postoperative stroke. Secondary endpoints encompassed cardiopulmonary bypass time, myocardial ischemic time, hypothermic circulatory arrest time, postoperative temporary neurological dysfunction, combination of stroke and temporary neurological dysfunction, as well as the need for reexploration for bleeding, renal replacement therapy, and tracheotomy. A random-effect model was utilized to calculate the pooled effect size. Results: Eleven studies met our eligibility criteria, enrolling a total of 7204 patients (2760 underwent aortic cannulation and 4444 underwent axillary cannulation). The operative mortality and incidence of postoperative stroke did not show statistical differences between the two groups, with a pooled odds ratio of 1.07 (95% confidence interval: 0.73–1.55) and 1.17 (0.95–1.42), respectively. Similarly, none of the secondary endpoints exhibited significant statistical differences between the two groups. Conclusions: Aortic cannulation can be a viable alternative to axillary artery cannulation for repair of acute aortic dissection type A, as both approaches present similar early clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The DeBakey classification divides Stanford acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) into DeBakey type I (D1) and type II (D2) according to the extent of acute aortic dissection (AAD). This retrospective study aimed to compare the early and late outcomes of D1-AAD and D2-AAD through a propensity score-matched analysis. Methods Between January 2009 and April 2020, 599 consecutive patients underwent ATAAD repair at our institution, and were dichotomized into D1 (n = 543; 90.7%) and D2 (n = 56; 9.3%) groups. Propensity scoring was performed with a 1:1 ratio, resulting in a matched cohort of 56 patients per group. The clinical features, postoperative complications, 5-year cumulative survival and freedom from reoperation rates were compared. Results In the overall cohort, the D1 group had a lower rate of preoperative shock and more aortic arch replacement with longer cardiopulmonary bypass time. The D1 group had a higher in-hospital mortality rate than the D2 group in overall (15.8% vs 5.4%; P = 0.036) and matched cohorts (19.6% vs 5.4%; P = 0.022). For patients that survived to discharge, the D1 and D2 groups demonstrated similar 5-year survival rates in overall (77.0% vs 85.2%; P = 0.378) and matched cohorts (79.1% vs 85.2%; P = 0.425). The 5-year freedom from reoperation rates for D1 and D2 groups were 80.0% and 97.1% in overall cohort (P = 0.011), and 93.6% and 97.1% in matched cohort (P = 0.474), respectively. Conclusions Patients with D1-AAD had a higher risk of in-hospital mortality than those with D2-AAD. However, for patients who survived to discharge, the 5-year survival rates were comparable between both groups.

Aim:Aimed to evaluate the relationship of serum biochemical and blood parameters with aortic rupture and dissection types according to the DeBakey classification.Methods:Forty-three patients, who were admitted to the emergency department between 01.01.2011 and 01.01.2019 with the diagnosis of aortic dissection, were retrospectively evaluated. Gender, age, symptoms at presentation, vital parameters, creatinine and, troponin levels, and hemogram parameters were recorded after blood tests. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and monocyte-to-platelet ratio were obtained from these values. These results were compared with the presence of aortic rupture and the DeBakey classification.Results:Of the 43 patients included in the study, 30 were male (69.8%), and 13 were female (30.2%). Aortic rupture was seen in two of the 30 male patients (6.7%) and none of the females (p=1.000). There was a significant difference only in blood urine nitrogen and monocyte-to-platelet ratio between patients with and without aortic rupture (p=0.035 and p=0.015, respectively).Conclusion:Most of the routinely evaluated blood and biochemical parameters in aortic dissection cases did not yield significant results in comparison to the DeBakey classification and the presence of rupture. Only blood urea nitrogen and monocyte-to-platelet ratio values were lower in patients with aortic rupture.

Copyright of Medical Bulletin of Haseki / Haseki Tip Bulteni is the property of Galenos Yayinevi Tic. LTD. STI and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

To investigate the impact of direct aortic cannulation (DAC) versus femoral arterial cannulation (FAC) on clinical outcomes of surgery for acute type A aortic dissection.PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched until August 25, 2023, to conduct a meta-analysis. Primary endpoints of the study were operative mortality and postoperative stroke. Secondary endpoints were cardiopulmonary bypass time, myocardial ischemic time, hypothermic circulatory arrest time, temporary neurological dysfunction (TND), combined stroke and TND, re-exploration for bleeding, and need for renal replacement therapy. A random-effect model was used to estimate the pooled effect size, and a leave-one-out method was used for the primary endpoints for sensitivity analysis.15 studies met our eligibility criteria, including a total of 7941 samples. Operative mortality was significantly lower in the DAC group with a pooled odds ratio (OR) of 0.72 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.61–0.85)]. Incidence of postoperative stroke was also lower in the DAC group with a pooled OR of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.66–0.94). However, after excluding one study with the greatest weight, the difference became nonsignificant. DAC was also associated with a lower incidence of postoperative TND, and re-exploration for bleeding with a pooled OR of 0.52 (95% CI: 0.37–0.73), and 0.60 (95% CI: 0.47–0.77), respectively.This meta-analysis showed that patients who underwent ATAAD repair with DAC had a lower incidence of operative mortality, postoperative stroke, TND, and re-exploration for bleeding compared to those who underwent FAC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the Penn classification in predicting in-hospital mortality after surgery in acute type A aortic dissection patients. Methods We evaluated 58 patients (42 men and 16 women; mean age 62.17 ± 10.6 years) who underwent emergency surgery for acute type A aortic dissection between September 2003 and June 2010 in our department. We investigated the correlation between the pre-operative malperfusion and in-hospital outcome after surgery. Results Twenty-eight patients (48%) were Penn class Aa (absence of branch vessel malperfusion or circulatory collapse), 11 (19%) were Penn class Ab (branch vessel malperfusion with ischaemia), 5 (9%) were Penn class Ac (circulatory collapse with or without cardiac involvement) and 14 (24%) were Penn class Abc (both branch vessel malperfusion and circulatory collapse). The number of patients with localized or generalized ischaemia or both, Penn class non-Aa, was 30 (52%). In-hospital mortality was 24%. In-hospital mortality was significantly higher in Penn class Abc and Penn class non-Aa. Intensive unit care stay, hospital ward stay and overall hospital stay was longer in Penn class non-Aa vs Penn class Aa. De Bakey type I dissection and type II diabetes mellitus were associated with in-hospital mortality. Conclusion Preoperative malperfusion is important for the evaluation of patients with acute aortic type A dissection. The Penn classification is a simple and quick method to apply and predict in-hospital mortality and outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Uncomplicated acute type-B aortic dissection (ATBAD) is a misnomer because it has subgroups with excessive mortality risk. The Penn classification has designated these ATBAD presentations as class-A because they initially are characterized by the absence of malperfusion and/or aortic rupture. The Penn classification also has designated class-A high-risk subgroups as type I and low-risk subgroups as type II. The risk factors for Penn class-A type-I presentations relate to medical therapy; aortic anatomy, and dissection extent as outlined by the DeBakey classification. Tight medical therapy significantly protects against aortic complications. Beta-blockade, angiotensin inhibition, and calcium channel antagonists may reduce mortality. The details of optimal medical therapy require further research. The aortic risk factors for type-I presentations include false lumen size and patency, ulcer-like projections, aortic diameter >40 mm, and intimal tear characteristics such as size and proximal location. The prognostic role of dissection extent in ATBAD remains unclear, requiring further investigation to determine its effect on natural history. Future trials in Penn class-A ATBAD should focus on type-I presentations. The Penn classification can serve as a clinical framework for trial design, laying the groundwork for future management advances. It also may provide a common language to facilitate standardized definitions, trial design, and management approaches for this high-risk patient cohort. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Objective: The DeBakey classification was used to discriminate the extent of acute aortic dissection (AD) and was correlated to long-term outcome and re-intervention rate. A slight modification of type II subgroup definition was applied by incorporating the aortic arch, when full resectability of the dissection process was given. Methods: Between January 2001 and March 2010, 118 patients (64% male, mean age 59 years) underwent surgery for acute AD. As many as 74 were operated on for type I and 44 for type II AD. Complete resection of all entry sites was performed, including antegrade stent grafting for proximal descending lesions. Results: Patients were comparable with respect to demographics and preoperative hemodynamic status. They underwent isolated ascending replacement, hemiarch, or total arch replacement in 7%, 26%, and 67% in type I, versus 27%, 37%, and 36% in type II, respectively. Additional descending stent grafting was performed in 33/74 (45%) type I patients. In-hospital mortality was 14%, 16% (12/74) in type I versus 9% (4/44, type II), p =0.405. After 5 years, the estimated survival rate was 63% in type I versus 80% in type II, p =0.135. In type II, no distal aortic re-intervention was required. In type I, the freedom of distal re-interventions was 82% in patients with additional stent grafting versus 53% in patients without, p =0.022. Conclusions: The slightly modified DeBakey classification exactly reflects late outcome and aortic re-intervention probability. Thus, in type II patients, the aorta seems to be healed without any probability of later re-operation or re-intervention. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Summary: Recent advances in the management of acute Stanford type A dissection have highlighted the clinical importance of clinical presentation and extent of dissection. The Penn classification of type A clinical presentations is based on ischemic profiles that not only determine mortality but also influence management options. The extent of type A dissection as summarized by the DeBakey classification significantly determines the role of endovascular intervention in this important disease. We propose an integration of these three classifications of acute type A dissection as a framework for future advances in diagnosis, intervention and prognosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: To analyze the characteristics of aortic dissection in the elderly, we reviewed 168 cases from January 1999 to September 2005 in a medical center in Taiwan. Fifty-six cases were suitable for enrollment in our study. Of these, 44 (79%) were male and 12 (21%) were female; ages ranged from 29 to 92 years, with a mean of 61 ± 11.75 years. We defined elderly as age ≥ 65 years. There was no obvious discrepancy between age and types of aortic dissections involved (p = 0.726). The elderly had the lower mean systolic blood pressure (166.4 mm Hg) upon arrival at the Emergency Department (p = 0.002). Presentation to the Emergency Department with chest pain or chest tightness was more commonly seen in the elderly (66.7%) (p = 0.042). The mean hospital stay was 12.6 ± 0.5 days, and it was longer in the elderly group (12.96 days) (p = 0.009). Otherwise, the mortality rate was 6.7% ± 3.6%. We found a lower mortality rate in the elderly than in the younger group (4% vs. 9%, respectively; p = 0.008). [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: The DeBakey classification divides Stanford acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) into DeBakey type I (D1) and type II (D2) according to the extent of acute aortic dissection (AAD). This retrospective study aimed to compare the early and late outcomes of D1-AAD and D2-AAD through a propensity score-matched analysis.Methods: Between January 2009 and April 2020, 599 consecutive patients underwent ATAAD repair at our institution, and were dichotomized into D1 (n = 543; 90.7%) and D2 (n = 56; 9.3%) groups. Propensity scoring was performed with a 1:1 ratio, resulting in a matched cohort of 56 patients per group. The clinical features, postoperative complications, 5-year cumulative survival and freedom from reoperation rates were compared.Results: In the overall cohort, the D1 group had a lower rate of preoperative shock and more aortic arch replacement with longer cardiopulmonary bypass time. The D1 group had a higher in-hospital mortality rate than the D2 group in overall (15.8% vs 5.4%; P = 0.036) and matched cohorts (19.6% vs 5.4%; P = 0.022). For patients that survived to discharge, the D1 and D2 groups demonstrated similar 5-year survival rates in overall (77.0% vs 85.2%; P = 0.378) and matched cohorts (79.1% vs 85.2%; P = 0.425). The 5-year freedom from reoperation rates for D1 and D2 groups were 80.0% and 97.1% in overall cohort (P = 0.011), and 93.6% and 97.1% in matched cohort (P = 0.474), respectively.Conclusions: Patients with D1-AAD had a higher risk of in-hospital mortality than those with D2-AAD. However, for patients who survived to discharge, the 5-year survival rates were comparable between both groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aortic dissection is relatively uncommon, but often presents with acute severe chest or back pain and acute hemodynamic compromise and is associated with high mortality. We present a case of aortic dissection with an atypical presentation in a heart failure patient and the challenges encountered to make the diagnosis. The patient was a 54-year-old African American female who presented with progressively worsening exertional dyspnea and orthopnea for three days and sensation of indigestion and bloating. The patient denied any recent history of chest pain and she was initially admitted for heart failure exacerbation. Her admission chest x-ray showed severe cardiomegaly with a prominence of pulmonary vascular but there was a borderline widening of mediastinum measuring 8.2 cm. Physical exam showed unequal dorsalis pedis pulses (fainter on the right side) and systolic blood pressure difference of more than 20 mmHg between bilateral upper extremities. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) of chest, abdomen, and pelvis confirmed the diagnosis of dissection of thoracic and abdominal aorta extending from the left subclavian artery to the femoral artery. The patient was managed with labetalol drip and later transferred to a tertiary center for an elevated level of care where the endovascular intervention was performed. The patient then followed up with a vascular clinic for serial CTA and heart failure clinic for optimization of core measures. In conclusion, this case highlights the importance of clinical suspicion of aortic dissection and discusses the various clinical presentations of aortic dissection and its management. Being a highly fatal condition, prompt diagnosis is extremely important and is often life-saving. Therefore, it is important for physicians to be aware of atypical presentations of aortic dissection to initiate timely interventions to avoid catastrophic complications., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright © 2021, Breitling et al.)

The authors present a case of syncope that was caused by aortic dissection. As the main artery to the system circulation, aortic dissection can manifest in numerous ways. This case reminds the clinician of the high index of suspicion necessary to diagnose this potentially life-threatening problem. Indeed, the mortality rate increases 2% per hour in the first 24 hours for a type A aortic dissection, so prompt diagnosis is imperative. The diagnostic complexity in this case is compounded by the very broad differential diagnosis for both aortic dissection and syncope., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright © 2021, Rivera-Alvarez et al.)

The author reflects on the advancement in surgery related to acute type A arotic dissection in heart.

A response from the authors of an article that demonstrates the success of dissecting the aortic wall in the previous issue is presented.