Background: Guidelines supporting the decision to replace the aorta in patients with chronic asymptomatic proximal aortic disease are limited by lack of data on operative risks and long-term effectiveness in relation to aortic size. Therefore, we assessed and compared outcomes of patients undergoing elective isolated proximal aortic replacement for this disease vs replacement during multicomponent operations.
Methods: From January 2006 to January 2011, 1,889 patients underwent proximal aortic replacement (isolated, 212; multicomponent, 1,677) for chronic asymptomatic ascending and arch pathology. Mean age was 60 ± 14 years, and maximum proximal aortic diameter was 52 ± 10 mm (isolated) and 49 ± 10 mm (multicomponent; p = 0.0004). Propensity matching using 64 preoperative variables yielded 197 well-matched patient pairs.
Results: Patients were more likely to undergo isolated replacement if they had prior cardiac operations and a larger middescending aortic diameter (p < 0.0001). Multicomponent operations were more common among those with connective tissue disorder or porcelain aorta. Among propensity-matched patients, in-hospital mortality was 1 of 197 (0.5%) in the isolated group vs 8 of 197 (4.1%) in the multicomponent group. Occurrence of stroke, renal failure, and prolonged ventilation were similar. Median postoperative stay was 7.9 vs 8.1 days (p = 0.07). At 30 days, 1 year, and 4 years, survival was 97%, 93%, and 87%, and freedom from reintervention was 98%, 90%, and 89%, respectively, similar between groups.
Conclusions: Elective ascending aortic replacement is safe and effective. Ascending aneurysms should be treated aggressively even when encountered in patients undergoing a multicomponent operation. An aggressive approach to replacement of the ascending aorta may be warranted given the increased risk of stroke during a subsequent reoperation.
Copyright © 2016 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.