Open hemiarch versus clamped ascending aorta replacement for aortopathy during initial bicuspid aortic valve replacement.

aneurysm aortopathy bicuspid aortic valve circulatory arrest hemiarch replacement

Journal

The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery
ISSN: 1097-685X
Titre abrégé: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0376343

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jan 2021
Historique:
received: 06 02 2019
revised: 03 09 2019
accepted: 06 09 2019
medline: 24 11 2019
pubmed: 24 11 2019
entrez: 24 11 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

There is controversy regarding the extent of aortic resection necessary in patients with aortopathy related to bicuspid aortic valve disease. To address this issue, we reviewed our experience in patients undergoing ascending aorta replacement during bicuspid aortic valve replacement. We reviewed 702 patients who underwent ascending aorta replacement at the time of initial nonemergent native bicuspid aortic valve replacement at our institution between January 2000 and June 2017. Treatment cohorts included an open hemiarch replacement group (n = 225; 32%) and a clamped ascending aorta replacement group (n = 477; 68%). Median patient age was 60 years (interquartile range [IQR], 51-67 years), female sex was present in 113 patients (16%), ejection fraction was 62% (IQR, 56%-66%), and aortic arch diameter was 33 mm (IQR, 29-36 mm). Cardiopulmonary bypass time was longer in the hemiarch replacement group (188 minutes vs 97 minutes; P < .001). Procedure-related complications (36%) and mortality (<1%) were similar in the 2 groups; however, the hemiarch group had an increased odds of blood transfusion (odds ratio, 1.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-2.28; P = .006). The median duration of follow-up was 6.0 years (95% CI, 5.3-6.8 years). Overall survival was 94 ± 1% at 5 years and 80 ± 2% at 10 years. Multivariable analysis demonstrated similar survival in the 2 groups (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.51-1.33; P = .439). No repeat aortic arch operations were done for aortopathy over the duration of clinical follow-up. Compared with patients in the clamped ascending aorta replacement group, patients in the hemi-arch replacement group had longer cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross-clamp times, along with an increased risk of blood transfusion, but similar freedom from repeat aortic arch operation and survival. We identified no advantage of performing hemiarch replacement in the absence of aortic arch dilation.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
There is controversy regarding the extent of aortic resection necessary in patients with aortopathy related to bicuspid aortic valve disease. To address this issue, we reviewed our experience in patients undergoing ascending aorta replacement during bicuspid aortic valve replacement.
METHODS METHODS
We reviewed 702 patients who underwent ascending aorta replacement at the time of initial nonemergent native bicuspid aortic valve replacement at our institution between January 2000 and June 2017. Treatment cohorts included an open hemiarch replacement group (n = 225; 32%) and a clamped ascending aorta replacement group (n = 477; 68%).
RESULTS RESULTS
Median patient age was 60 years (interquartile range [IQR], 51-67 years), female sex was present in 113 patients (16%), ejection fraction was 62% (IQR, 56%-66%), and aortic arch diameter was 33 mm (IQR, 29-36 mm). Cardiopulmonary bypass time was longer in the hemiarch replacement group (188 minutes vs 97 minutes; P < .001). Procedure-related complications (36%) and mortality (<1%) were similar in the 2 groups; however, the hemiarch group had an increased odds of blood transfusion (odds ratio, 1.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-2.28; P = .006). The median duration of follow-up was 6.0 years (95% CI, 5.3-6.8 years). Overall survival was 94 ± 1% at 5 years and 80 ± 2% at 10 years. Multivariable analysis demonstrated similar survival in the 2 groups (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.51-1.33; P = .439). No repeat aortic arch operations were done for aortopathy over the duration of clinical follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Compared with patients in the clamped ascending aorta replacement group, patients in the hemi-arch replacement group had longer cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross-clamp times, along with an increased risk of blood transfusion, but similar freedom from repeat aortic arch operation and survival. We identified no advantage of performing hemiarch replacement in the absence of aortic arch dilation.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31757461
pii: S0022-5223(19)32012-4
doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.09.028
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

12-20.e2

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2019 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Kevin L Greason (KL)

Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn. Electronic address: greason.kevin@mayo.edu.

Juan A Crestanello (JA)

Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

Katherine S King (KS)

Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

Gabor Bagameri (G)

Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

Sertac M Cicek (SM)

Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

John M Stulak (JM)

Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

Richard C Daly (RC)

Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

Joseph A Dearani (JA)

Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

Hartzell V Schaff (HV)

Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

Classifications MeSH