TY - JOUR
T1 - Open hemiarch versus clamped ascending aorta replacement for aortopathy during initial bicuspid aortic valve replacement
AU - Greason, Kevin L.
AU - Crestanello, Juan A.
AU - King, Katherine S.
AU - Bagameri, Gabor
AU - Cicek, Sertac M.
AU - Stulak, John M.
AU - Daly, Richard C.
AU - Dearani, Joseph A.
AU - Schaff, Hartzell V.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery
PY - 2021/1
Y1 - 2021/1
N2 - 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: 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: 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: 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.
AB - 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: 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: 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: 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.
KW - aneurysm
KW - aortopathy
KW - bicuspid aortic valve
KW - circulatory arrest
KW - hemiarch replacement
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074175871&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85074175871&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.09.028
DO - 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.09.028
M3 - Article
C2 - 31757461
AN - SCOPUS:85074175871
SN - 0022-5223
VL - 161
SP - 12-20.e2
JO - Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
JF - Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
IS - 1
ER -