From January 1986 to September 1995, total aortic arch replacement (TAR) for aortic dissection was performed using selective cerebral perfusion in 151 patients. In 18 patients, the surgical procedures of extended aortic arch replacement (EAR) involving the proximal descending aorta through a median sternotomy were applied. To evaluate the outcome of EAR, the early and late results were compared with those of non-extended aortic arch replacements (NAR) through a median sternotomy (n = 66). The early mortality rates for EAR and NAR were 5.6% and 16.7%, respectively (NS); the lower rate for EAR may be due to the fact that EAR were performed more recently than NAR. The differences between EAR and NAR with respect to the amount of blood transfused intraoperatively and the respiratory index at 12 hours after surgery were not statistically significant. In addition, the extracorporeal bypass time in EAR was no longer than that in NAR. Thus, as compared with the NAR procedure, the EAR procedure did not have a negative effect on early outcome. Regarding late results, the actuarial survival rates after EAR and NAR, respectively were 87% and 72% at 1 year, 87% and 69% at 3 years (NS). The early thrombo-occlusion rates of the remaining false lumens after TAR in broad aortic dissections were 56% after EAR and 33% after NAR (p = 0.21). These results suggest that EAR may be a more useful procedure in some patients requiring TAR.