Heterogeneity in the remodeling of aneurysms of the ascending aorta with tricuspid aortic valves.

OBJECTIVES: The study addresses mechanisms driving the formation of ascending aortic aneurysms by comparing the maximal dilatation area with the transition area immediately adjacent to the normal aortic tissue left in place during surgical repair. METHODS: Aortic wall specimens were taken from the maximal dilatation area and transition area in 10 patients undergoing surgery for ascending aortic aneurysms and fixed for histology and immunohistochemistry for vascular smooth muscle cells (alpha-actin), endothelial cells (CD31), and macrophages (CD68). Tissue concentrations of vascular endothelial growth factor, matrix metalloproteinase-2, and matrix metalloproteinase-9 were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The results are expressed as medians with their 25th and 75th centiles. RESULTS: Vascular smooth muscle cells were significantly more abundant in the maximal dilatation area than in the transition area (20.3 [14.8-24.4]/10(-2) mm2 vs 8.0 [6.4-9.3]/10(-2) mm2, respectively, P = .002). In the maximal dilatation area, vascular smooth muscle cells had lost their typical lamellar organization, whereas it was preserved in the transition area. Microvessels were significantly more abundant in the media of transition area than in the maximal dilatation area (7.5 [2.9-10.1]/mm2 vs 1.75 [1.5-2.0]/mm2, respectively, P = .008) and were associated with an inflammatory cell infiltration that predominated in their immediate vicinity. There were no significant differences in vascular endothelial growth factor, matrix metalloproteinase-2, and matrix metalloproteinase-9 between both areas. CONCLUSIONS: The transition area appears as a disease progression front characterized by microvessel formation and inflammatory cell infiltration. In contrast, increased vascular smooth muscle cell density in the maximal dilatation area suggests a healing process, although inefficient to prevent aortic dilatation.

Pathobiology of idiopathic ascending aortic aneurysms.

The majority of ascending aortic aneurysms cannot be related to any specific etiology and should be qualified as idiopathic. The pathobiology of ascending aortic aneurysms remains incompletely understood. Data from direct study are still scarce and often limited because of patient heterogenicity. Currently available information suggests that destructive remodeling of the aortic wall, inflammation and angiogenesis, biomechanical wall stress, and molecular genetics are relevant mechanisms of idiopathic ascending aortic aneurysm formation and progression. Further understanding of these mechanisms will likely provide novel diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutical tools for the clinician.

Aortic root replacement after previous surgical intervention on the aortic valve, aortic root, or ascending aorta.

BACKGROUND: Aortic root replacement after a previous operation on the aortic valve, aortic root, or ascending aorta remains a major challenge. METHODS: Records of 56 consecutive patients (44 men; mean age, 56.4 +/- 13.6 years) undergoing reoperative aortic root replacement between June 1994 and June 2005 were reviewed retrospectively. RESULTS: Reoperation was performed 9.4 +/- 6.7 years after the last cardiac operation. Indications for reoperation were true aneurysm (n = 14 [25%]), false aneurysm (n = 10 [18%]), dissection or redissection (n = 9 [16%]), structural or nonstructural valve dysfunction (n = 10 [18%]), prosthetic valve-graft infection (n = 12 [21%]), and miscellaneous (n = 1 [2%]). Procedures performed were aortic root replacement (n = 47 [84%]), aortic root replacement plus mitral valve procedure (n = 5 [9%]), and aortic root replacement plus arch replacement (n = 4 [7%]). In 14 (25%) patients coronary artery bypass grafting had to be performed unexpectedly during the same procedure or immediately after the procedure to re-establish coronary perfusion. Hospital mortality reached 17.9% (n = 10). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed the need for unplanned perioperative coronary artery bypass grafting as the sole independent risk factor for hospital death (P = .005). Actuarial survival was 83.8% +/- 4.9% at 1 month, 73.0% +/- 6.3% at 1 year, and 65.7% +/- 9.0% at 5 years after the operation. One patient had recurrence of endocarditis 6.7 months after the operation and required repeated homograft aortic root replacement. CONCLUSION: Reoperative aortic root replacement remains associated with a high postoperative mortality. The need to perform unplanned coronary artery bypass grafting during reoperative aortic root replacement is a major risk factor for hospital death. The optimal technique for coronary reconstruction in this setting remains to be debated.