Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:We performed an intention to treat analysis of initial cannulation strategy to assess impact on perioperative outcomes in acute type A dissection using multicenter data. METHODS:All patients undergoing surgical repair of acute type A dissection from a multicenter national registry of 9 high-volume aortic centers were analyzed. Cannulation strategies included in the analysis were: Axillary, Femoral, Direct Aortic, and Innominate. Among 950 patients, we excluded those with chronic, type B dissections, and unknown initial cannulation strategy. Patients with multiple cannulation strategies were included if the sequence in which strategies were initiated was known. The final cohort consisted of 936 patients. Primary outcomes were stroke and death. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to adjust for baseline differences. P values represent Tukey's post hoc comparisons. RESULTS:Among 936 patients, cannulation strategies in descending order included: Axillary (n=502, 53%), Femoral (n=268, 29%), Aortic (n=104, 11%), and Innominate (n=59, 6%). Of these 46 (5%) had a change in the initial cannulation strategy prior to initiating circulatory arrest, mainly for poor axillary flow or initial femoral cannulation for hemodynamic instability followed by axillary. Femoral patients were younger (61.3±13.8) than Aortic patients (66.4±12.52, p=0.01) and more likely to present with malperfusion (n=123, 45.9%) compared to Aortic, Axillary, or Innominate patients (p <0.01). Femoral patients also had the longest duration of cerebral ischemia (Femoral: 16.9±16min, Aortic: 11.5±11.8min; Axillary: 4.41±10.3min; Innominate: 2.53±6min, p<0.01 for all vs Femoral). Unadjusted risk of death, stroke, and prolonged ventilation was lowest among Axillary and Innominate patients (Figure 1A). Length of stay was also reduced among Innominate patients. Multivariable regression demonstrated Axillary [OR 0.52 (0.36-0.75), p=0.004] and Innominate [OR 0.19 (0.07-0.54), p=0.009] cannulation to be associated with significantly reduced risk of stroke (Figure 1C). A non-significant signal of reduced death in Axillary patients remained [OR 0.66 (0.45-0.96), p=0.07]. CONCLUSIONS:In high volume aortic centers, an initial cannulation strategy using Axillary access is associated with reduced risk of stroke compared to Femoral. Axillary cannulation should be the preferred strategy in experienced centers if anatomy and stability allow.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The management of aortic arch disease is complex. Open surgical management continues to evolve, and the introduction of endovascular repair is revolutionizing aortic arch surgery. Although these innovative techniques have generated the opportunity for better outcomes in select patients, they have also introduced confusion and uncertainty regarding best practices. METHODS:In New York, we developed a collaborative group, the New York Aortic Consortium, as a means of cross-linking knowledge and working together to better understand and treat aortic disease. In our meeting in May 2023, regional aortic experts and invited international experts discussed the contemporary management of aortic arch disease, differences in interpretation of the available literature and the integration of endovascular technology into disease management. We summarized the current state of aortic arch surgery in this review article. RESULTS:Approaches to aortic arch repair have evolved substantially, whether it be methods to reduce cerebral ischaemia, improve haemostasis, simplify future operations or expand options for high-risk patients with endovascular approaches. However, the transverse aortic arch remains challenging to repair. Among our collaborative group of cardiac/aortic surgeons, we discovered a wide disparity in our practice patterns and our management strategies of patients with aortic arch disease. CONCLUSIONS:It is important to build unique institutional expertise in the context of complex and evolving management of aortic arch disease with open surgery, endovascular repair and hybrid approaches, tailored to the risk profiles and anatomical specifics of individual patients.

BACKGROUND:Cannulation strategy in acute type A dissection (ATAD) varies widely without known gold standards. This study compared ATAD outcomes of axillary vs femoral artery cannulation in a large cohort from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD). METHODS:The study retrospectively reviewed 2145 patients from the IRAD Interventional Cohort (1996-2021) who underwent ATAD repair with axillary or femoral cannulation (axillary group: n = 1106 [52%]; femoral group: n = 1039 [48%]). End points included the following: early mortality; neurologic, respiratory, and renal complications; malperfusion; and tamponade. All outcomes are presented as axillary with respect to femoral. RESULTS:The proportion of patients younger than 70 years in both groups was similar (n = 1577 [74%]), as were bicuspid aortic valve, Marfan syndrome, and previous dissection. Patients with femoral cannulation had slightly more aortic insufficiency (408 [55%] vs 429 [60%]; P = .058) and coronary involvement (48 [8%] vs 70 [13%]; P = .022]. Patients with axillary cannulation underwent more total aortic arch (156 [15%] vs 106 [11%]; P = .02) and valve-sparing root replacements (220 [22%] vs 112 [12%]; P < .001). More patients with femoral cannulation underwent commissural resuspension (269 [30.9%] vs 324 [35.3%]; P = .05). Valve replacement rates were not different. The mean duration of cardiopulmonary bypass was longer in the femoral group (190 [149-237] minutes vs 196 [159-247] minutes; P = .037). In-hospital mortality was similar between the axillary (n = 165 [15%]) and femoral (n = 149 [14%]) groups (P = .7). Furthermore, there were no differences in stroke, visceral ischemia, tamponade, respiratory insufficiency, coma, or spinal cord ischemia. CONCLUSIONS:Axillary cannulation is associated with a more stable ATAD presentation, but it is a more extensive intervention compared with femoral cannulation. Both procedures have equivalent early mortality, stroke, tamponade, and malperfusion outcomes after statistical adjustment.

OBJECTIVE:This study evaluated the frequency and clinical impact of thromboembolic complications after frozen elephant trunk aortic arch repair using the Thoraflex device (Terumo Aortic). METHODS:A total of 128 consecutive patients (mean age 67.9 ± 13.7 years, 31.0% female) underwent frozen elephant trunk aortic arch repair using the Thoraflex device between September 2014 and May 2021 in 4 Canadian centers. Patient baseline characteristics, intraoperative details, and frozen elephant trunk thromboembolic complications were collected retrospectively and analyzed. RESULTS:Fifteen patients (11.7%) had thrombus visualized within the frozen elephant trunk stent graft on imaging (n = 8; 53.3%) or had a thromboembolic event (n = 9; 60.0%) before hospital discharge. Sites of embolism were mesenteric (n = 8; 88.9%), renal (n = 4; 44.4%), and iliofemoral (n = 1; 11.1%). Patients who experienced thromboembolic complications were more likely to have a history of autoimmune disease (n = 3; 20.0% vs n = 2; 1.8%; P = .01) and implantation of a longer frozen elephant trunk stent graft (150 mm vs 100 mm) (n = 13; 86.7% vs n = 45; 39.8%; P < .001). All patients with thromboembolic complications received therapeutic anticoagulation, and a smaller proportion required an open surgical (n = 5; 33.3%) or an endovascular (n = 2; 13.3%) intervention. Radiographic resolution of thromboembolic complications was observed in 86.7% of patients (n = 13). In-hospital mortality occurred in 1 patient, stroke occurred in 1 patient, and transient spinal cord injury occurred in 1 patient. CONCLUSIONS:Thromboembolic complications occur more often than previously recognized after frozen elephant trunk aortic arch repair using the Thoraflex device and are associated with increased rates of surgical and endovascular reintervention. Prevention and management of these complications require further study.

BACKGROUND:This exploratory analysis of the randomized controlled Aortic Surgery Cerebral Protection Evaluation CardioLink-3 trial sought to determine if cerebral oximetry desaturation during elective proximal arch repair is associated with detrimental postoperative neuroradiologic and neurofunctional outcomes. METHODS:Cerebral oximetry and pre- and postoperative brain magnetic resonance imaging data from 101 participants were analyzed. Oximetry data from the trial allocation groups were compared; the relationships between cerebral oximetry indices and new ischemic cerebral lesions on magnetic resonance imaging and neurologic outcomes were also evaluated. RESULTS:Total cerebral desaturation events (>20% decrease from baseline) on the left (median [interquartile range], 1 [1-3] vs 1.5 [0.5-3] with innominate and axillary cannulation; P = .80) were comparable to those on the right (1 [1-3] vs 1 [0-3]; P = .75) as were the total area under the curve of desaturation (left, P = .61; right, P = .84). Seventy patients had new ischemic lesions, among whom 36 had new severe lesions. Total desaturation events and area under the curve of desaturation were similar in patients with and without new ischemic lesions or severe lesions. The nadir regional cerebral saturation was lower on the left (49% [41-56]) than the right (53% [44-59]); left desaturation episodes were associated with lower postoperative cognitive test scores (P = .004). CONCLUSIONS:The innominate and axillary cannulation techniques for elective proximal arch repair with unilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion were associated with similar occurrences of cerebral oximetry desaturation and neither were associated with new ischemic lesions.

BACKGROUND:Transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement (TTVR) abolishes tricuspid regurgitation (TR) and has emerged as a definitive treatment for TR. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this multicenter, observational study was to determine the clinical characteristics and short-term outcomes of patients with TR screened for TTVR. METHODS:Patients underwent TTVR screening at 7 centers on a compassionate-use basis. The primary endpoints were NYHA functional class and TR grade at 30-day follow-up. Secondary endpoints included all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, technical success, and reasons for TTVR screening failure. RESULTS:A total of 149 patients (median age 79 years [Q1-Q3: 72-84 years], 54% women) underwent TTVR screening. The TTVR screening failure rate was 74%, mainly related to large tricuspid annular diameter. Patients undergoing TTVR (n = 38) had significant functional improvements (NYHA functional class I or II from 21% to 68%; P < 0.001), with TR ≤1+ in 97% at 30-day follow-up (P < 0.001 from baseline). Technical success was achieved in 91%, with no intraprocedural mortality or conversion to surgery. At 30-day follow-up, mortality was 8%, heart failure hospitalization 5%, major bleeding 18%, and reintervention 9%. Patients who failed screening for TTVR and subsequently underwent "bailout" transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (n = 26) had favorable outcomes (NYHA functional class I or II from 27% to 58%; P < 0.001), with TR ≤1+ in 43% at 30-day follow-up (P < 0.001 from baseline). CONCLUSIONS:This first real-world report of TTVR screening demonstrated a high screening failure rate, mainly related to large tricuspid annular diameter. Patients undergoing TTVR had superior TR reduction and symptom alleviation compared with bailout tricuspid transcatheter edge-to-edge repair, at the cost of greater procedural complications.