The Clinical Impact of the Extension of Acute Type A Aortic Surgery on Long-Term Outcomes: Should We Tend to Be Conservative?

Background and

Objectives

Despite advances in surgical techniques, industry adjuncts, and cerebral perfusion techniques, the in-hospital mortality rate of type A acute dissection (TAAD) remains at 15-30%. This study aimed to investigate the influence of different extents of aortic resection on survival and quality of life (QoL) after long-term follow-up. Materials and

Methods

A retrospective observational trial was performed, including 165 patients operated upon for TAAD. Patients were divided into two groups according to the extent of their aortic repair: the first group comprised patients who had ascending aorta replacement and the second included patients who had hemiarch or total arch replacement. The groups were compared with regard to their baseline characteristics, operative characteristics, survival, complications, and QoL during nine years of follow-up.

Results

The mean follow-up time was 75.6 months (1-108 months). The mean survival in the ascending aorta repair group was 89.651 (81.242-98.061) months and was 54.801 (40.053-69.548) months in the hemiarch and arch group; the difference between the groups was significant (log-rank p < 0.001). The rate of new postoperative neurological deficits was statistically higher in the hemiarch and arch group (17.5% vs. 8.4%, p = 0.045), the most common being stroke, and was also more frequent in the hemiarch and arch group than in the ascending aorta group (with statistical significance (15.7% vs. 6.5%)). The mean SF-12 physical score from the QoL questionnaire was higher in the ascending aorta replacement group than in the hemiarch and arch group (50.1 ± 7.3 vs. 44.0 ± 11.9, p = 0.017). Additionally, the mean SF-12 mental score was higher in the ascending aorta replacement group (52.3 ± 7.3 vs. 47.1 ± 12.8, p = 0.032).

Conclusions

A more aggressive approach involving aortic arch repair means a lower survival rate and lesser quality of life after long-term follow-up in comparison with the replacement of the ascending aorta. If clinically applicable, a more defensive strategy may be considered.