Simplifying aortic arch surgery: open zone 2 arch with single branched thoracic endovascular aortic repair completion.

BACKGROUND: Distal aortic complications from acute DeBakey I dissection repair are an important source of late morbidity and mortality. We present an early experience of using a novel single-branched thoracic aortic endograft in conjunction with open techniques to treat acute DeBakey I aortic dissection. METHODS: The patients in this series include five hyperacute dissections managed with a combined zone 2 partial arch replacement and placement of a zone 2 single subclavian branch endograft. RESULTS: There were no perioperative mortalities, strokes, or spinal cord ischemia in any patients at either stage of the procedure. At follow-up imaging, no patients had anterograde flow into the false lumen. All patients experienced false lumen thrombosis in the stented portion of the aorta. CONCLUSIONS: This combination of open repair techniques and the use of a novel branched endograft resulted in excellent early outcomes in this pioneer series. Further investigation of these techniques in a prospective fashion is warranted.

Outcomes, readmissions, and costs in transfemoral and alterative access transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the US Medicare population.

OBJECTIVE: To comprehensively evaluate and compare utilization, outcomes, and especially costs of transfemoral (TF), transapical (TA), and transaortic (TAO) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS: All Medicare fee-for-service patients undergoing TF (n = 4065), TA (n = 691), or TAO (n = 274) TAVR between January 1, 2011, and November 30, 2012, were identified using Health Care Procedure Classification Codes present on Medicare claims. Hospital charges from Medicare claims were converted to costs using hospital-specific Medicare cost-to-charge ratios. RESULTS: TA and TAO patients were similar in age, race, and common comorbidities. Compared with TF patients, TA and TAO patients were more likely to be female and to have peripheral vascular disease, chronic lung disease, and renal failure. Thirty-day mortality rates were higher among TA and TAO patients than among TF patients (TA, 9.6%; TAO, 8.0%; TF, 5.0%; P < .001). Adjusted mortality beyond 1 year did not differ by access. TA patients were more likely to require cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Increased adjusted mortality was associated with CPB (hazard ratio, 2.13; P < .01) and increased 30-day cost ($62,000 [interquartile range (IQR)], $45,100-$86,400 versus $48,800 [IQR, $38,100-$62,900]; P < .01). Cost at 30 days was lowest for TF ($48,600) compared with TA ($49,800; P < .01) and TAO ($53,200; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: For patients ineligible to receive TF TAVR, TAO and TA approaches offer similar clinical outcomes at similar cost with acceptable operative and 1-year survival, except for higher rates of CPB use in TA patients. CPB was associated with worse survival and increased costs.

At the Root of the Repair Debate: Outcomes After Elective Aortic Root Replacements for Aortic Insufficiency With Aneurysm.

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in aortic valve-sparing and valve repair operations, but the ideal operation and timing of intervention in these generally younger patients undergoing operations for aortic insufficiency (AI) and dilated ascending aorta remains controversial. METHODS: Root replacements at a single institution from 2002 to 2014 were reviewed. Inclusion criteria were age younger than 70 and presence of moderate or greater aortic insufficiency (AI), with or without aortic aneurysm. Of 1,425 root replacements, 220 patients were considered in the final analysis. RESULTS: Moderate AI was present in 87 patients and severe AI in 133 patients. The 30-day mortality was 0% in moderate AI patients and 2% (n = 3) in severe AI patients (p = 0.3). Freedom from reoperation was 95% at 10 years. Severe preoperative AI was associated with worse long-term survival compared with moderate AI (hazard ratio, 2.6; p = 0.04). Patients undergoing root replacement with moderate AI had similar survival compared with the age- and gender-matched United States population (log-rank p = 0.93), whereas patients with severe AI had significantly worse survival (log-rank p = 0.02). Other multivariable predictors of decreased long-term survival were age (hazard ratio, 1.1; p = 0.01) and preoperative renal failure (hazard ratio, 6.9; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Elective root replacement operations in patients younger than 70 are associated with low rates of mortality and reoperation, which should be considered the benchmark operation for aortic valve-sparing or repair operations in similar patients. Worse survival was associated with severe AI and older age, suggesting earlier intervention may be an appropriate therapeutic strategy in selected patients.

Unconventional Volume-Outcome Associations in Adult Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate institutional volume-outcome relationships in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) with subanalyses of ECMO in patients with a primary diagnosis of respiratory failure. METHODS: All institutions with adult ECMO discharges in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2002 to 2011 were evaluated. International Classification of Diseases (ninth revision) codes were used to identify ECMO-treated patients, indications, and concurrent procedures. Patients who were treated with ECMO after cardiotomy were excluded. Annual institutional and national volume of ECMO hospitalizations varied widely, hence the number of ECMO cases performed at an institution was calculated for each year independently. Institutions were grouped into high-, medium-, and low-volume terciles by year. Statistical analysis included hierarchical, multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: The in-hospital mortality rates for ECMO admissions at low-, medium-, and high-volume ECMO centers were 48% (n = 467), 60% (n = 285), and 57% (n = 445), respectively (p = 0.001). In post hoc pairwise comparisons, patients in low-volume hospitals were more likely to survive to discharge compared with patients in medium-volume (p = 0.001) and high-volume (p = 0.005) hospitals. There was no significant difference in survival between medium-volume and high-volume hospitals (p = 0.81). In a subanalysis of patients with respiratory failure, low-volume ECMO centers maintained the lowest rates of in-hospital mortality (47%), versus 61% in medium-volume institutions (p = 0.045) and 56% in high-volume institutions (p = 0.15). Multivariable logistical regression produced similar results in the entire study sample and in patients with respiratory failure. CONCLUSIONS: ECMO outcomes in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample do not follow a traditional volume-outcome relationship, and these results suggest that, in properly selected patients, ECMO can be performed with acceptable results in U.S. centers that do not perform a high volume of ECMO.