scholarly journals Might type A acute dissection repair with the addition of a frozen elephant trunk improve long-term survival compared to standard repair?

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 98-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michele Murzi ◽  
Kaushal K. Tiwari ◽  
Pier Andrea Farneti ◽  
Mattia Glauber
2020 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 707-713 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akihiro Yoshitake ◽  
Masato Tochii ◽  
Chiho Tokunaga ◽  
Jun Hayashi ◽  
Akitoshi Takazawa ◽  
...  

Abstract OBJECTIVES We evaluated the operative and long-term outcomes of the frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique for acute type A aortic dissection. METHODS This study evaluated 426 consecutive patients who underwent aortic repair for acute type A aortic dissection from June 2007 to December 2018 at our centre. Of these, 139 patients underwent total arch replacement with FET (FET group), and 287 underwent other procedures (no FET group). Ninety-two patients in the FET group were matched to 92 patients in the no FET group by using propensity score matching analysis. RESULTS Thirty-day mortality and neurological dysfunction were not significantly different between the FET and no FET groups (1.4% vs 2.4%, P = 0.50 and 5.0% vs 6.3%, P = 0.61, respectively). Long-term survival was better in the FET group than in the no FET group (P = 0.008). Freedom from distal thoracic reintervention was similar in the FET and no FET groups (P = 0.74). In the propensity-matched patients, freedom from aortic-related death was better in the FET group than in the no FET group (P = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS Operative outcomes showed no significant difference between the 2 groups. FET contributes to better long-term survival in patients with acute type A aortic dissection.


2017 ◽  
Vol 154 (4) ◽  
pp. 1175-1189.e2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei-Guo Ma ◽  
Wei Zhang ◽  
Jun-Ming Zhu ◽  
Bulat A. Ziganshin ◽  
Ai-Hua Zhi ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 254-262
Author(s):  
Yunxing Xue ◽  
Jun Pan ◽  
Hailong Cao ◽  
Fudong Fan ◽  
Xuan Luo ◽  
...  

Abstract OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes and follow-up results among 5 main aortic arch surgery methods for type A aortic dissection in a single centre. METHODS From 2002 to 2018, 958 type A aortic dissection patients who received surgical repair were divided into 5 groups according to the arch surgery method: hemiarch replacement (n = 206), island arch replacement (n = 54), total arch replacement with frozen elephant trunk (n = 425), triple-branched stent (n = 39) and fenestrated stent (n = 234). The indications for the different arch methods were related to the patient’s preoperative status, the location and extent of the dissection and the surgical ability of the surgeons. A comparative study was performed to identify the differences in the perioperative data, and the Kaplan–Meier analysis was used to assess the long-term survival and reintervention rates. Thirty matched surviving patients that were included in each group completed Computed tomography angiography to determine long-term reshaping effect. RESULTS The 30-day mortality rate was 15.8%, and there was no difference among the 5 groups (P = 0.848). The follow-up survival rates were similar among the 5 groups (P = 0.130), and the same was true for patients without reintervention (P = 0.471). In the propensity matching study, patients with stents (frozen elephant trunk, triple-branched stent, fenestrated stent) had a slower aortic dilation rate and a higher ratio of thrombosis in the false lumen at the descending aortic and abdominal aortic levels than patients without stents. CONCLUSIONS No standard method is available for arch surgery, and indications and long-term effects should be identified with clinical data. In our experiences, simpler surgical procedures could reduce mortality in critically ill patients and stents in the distal aorta could improve long-term reshape effects.


2015 ◽  
Vol 184 ◽  
pp. 285-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilir Hysi ◽  
Francis Juthier ◽  
Olivier Fabre ◽  
Olivier Fouquet ◽  
Natacha Rousse ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 57 (08) ◽  
pp. 496-497
Author(s):  
T. Takenaka ◽  
T. Yano ◽  
H. Kouso ◽  
T. Ohba ◽  
T. Kometani ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document