Primary angiosarcoma arising in the sinus of Valsalva: A case report.

INTRODUCTION: Primary angiosarcoma of the aorta, particularly within the sinus of Valsalva, is uncommon, with no documented instances of primary angiosarcoma. The absence of apparent clinical manifestations in this severe condition makes it challenging to diagnose, often resulting in a poor prognosis. CASE PRESENTATION: A 60-year-old patient underwent procedures for fistula closure and coronary artery bypass grafting, which resulted in the rupture of an aneurysm within the sinus of Valsalva. Computed tomography examination 5 years after the procedure suggested no pathological abnormalities. Nevertheless, the patient required repeat surgery at 67 years due to the observed expansion of the sinus of Valsalva aneurysm noted during a clinical evaluation, prompted by elevated levels of inflammatory markers. Exploration of the residual aneurysmal locus within the sinus of Valsalva revealed an intraluminal thrombus devoid of any demonstrable hemodynamic access into the aneurysmal sac. Histopathological assessment of the aneurysmal wall confirmed a definitive diagnosis of primary angiosarcoma within the sinus of Valsalva. After surgery, the patient exhibited pyrexia. Magnetic resonance imaging substantiated multifocal osseous metastases, corroborated by histological analysis following a bone biopsy, confirming a diagnosis of angiosarcoma. Therefore, adjuvant chemotherapy with paclitaxel was initiated. After 1 year, a sustained state of disease stability was noted. DISCUSSION: In this case, the need for surgical intervention, based on an expanded sinus of Valsalva aneurysm, culminated in the unanticipated detection of primary angiosarcoma. CONCLUSION: Neoplastic etiologies may plausibly underlie the pathogenesis of aneurysm formation in cases where the etiology remains obscure in the early stages of therapeutic intervention.

Role of Aggressive Aneurysm Sac Embolization Before Endovascular Abdominal Aneurysm Repair in Preventing Type II Endoleak and Sac Expansion.

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of aggressive embolization of side branches arising from the aneurysmal sac before endovascular aneurysm repair. Methods: This retrospective study included 95 patients who underwent endovascular infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair at Tottori University Hospital between October 2016 and January 2021. Of these, 54 underwent standard endovascular aneurysm repair (conventional group), and 41 underwent coiling of the inferior mesenteric and lumbar arteries before undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair (embolization group). The occurrence of type II endoleak, change in aneurysmal sac diameter, and reintervention rate due to type II endoleak during follow-up were evaluated. Results: Compared to the conventional group, the embolization group had a significantly lower incidence of type II endoleak, more frequent aneurysmal sac shrinkage, and lower aneurysmal sac growth related to type II endoleak. Conclusion: Our results demonstrated the effectiveness of aggressive aneurysmal sac embolization before endovascular aneurysm repair to prevent type II endoleak and the consequent long-term aneurysmal sac enlargement.

Robot-Assisted Aortic Valve Replacement　- First Clinical Report in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted valve surgery represents the latest development in the field of minimally invasive approaches. Robotic assistance may provide greater visualization, enhanced dexterity, and greater precision than traditional mini-thoracotomy aortic valve replacement.Methods and Results: Aortic valve replacement operations using the da Vinci Xi Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA) were performed on 2 patients, 1 with severe aortic insufficiency and the other with aortic stenosis. Both patients had an uneventful postoperative course and were discharged without any adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted assisted aortic valve replacement appears feasible and safe in limited cases.

Safe launch of a robotically assisted mitral valve repair program in a single center: experience of initial 20 cases under the Center for Minimally Invasive Surgery.

Robotically assisted mitral valve repair was approved by the Japanese government in April 2018. However, understanding robotic surgery involves steep learning curves of surgeons and dedicated cardiac teams. The Center for Minimally Invasive Surgery (CMIS) of Tottori University Hospital is a multidisciplinary organization established in 2011 with seven surgical departments. In this study, we report strategies for improving the safety of robotic surgery in the CMIS and early results of robotic mitral valve repair at our hospital. We reviewed the first 20 patients who underwent robotic primary mitral valve repair, including concomitant procedures, from October 2019 to September 2021 under the supervision of the CMIS. Before starting the program, the CMIS requires setting console time limit to 180 min and implementing risk management strategies through simulation training for various mechanical failures. Mitral valve repair was completed in all patients. There was no in-hospital or 30-day mortality. No conversion to median sternotomy was necessary. The analysis of mitral pathology revealed 1 case of functional mitral regurgitation, 12 cases of posterior lesions, 3 cases of anterior lesions, 3 cases of bileaflet lesions, and 1 case of commissural lesion. The average cross-clamp time was 133 ± 27 min. Sixteen cases had trace mitral regurgitation postoperatively, and 4 cases had mild mitral regurgitation. The median (interquartile range) postoperative hospital stay was 10 (8.5-12.5) days. Robotically assisted mitral valve repair was performed safely with assistance from the multidisciplinary CMIS, and the early results were satisfactory without compromising clinical outcomes.

Impact of frailty on early and mid-term outcomes of hybrid aortic arch repair.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of frailty on the clinical outcomes of hybrid aortic arch repair with debranching of the supra-aortic arteries. METHODS: Consecutive patients ≥ 75 years old who underwent hybrid aortic arch repair from January 2010 to December 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Using the Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA) scale, all patients with a CSHA scale score > 4 were defined as frail. The frail patients (FP) group and the non-frail patients (NFP) group were compared regarding the early and mid-term outcomes of hybrid aortic arch repair. RESULTS: A total of 84 patients were included. The early postoperative results were not markedly different between the groups, except that the rate of transfer to a rehabilitation hospital was higher in the FP group than in the NFP group. The survival at 5 years was significantly lower in the FP group at 43.0% than in the NFP group at 67.7% (P = 0.015). However, the freedom from aorta-related death was not significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Frailty did not affect the short-term outcomes of hybrid aortic arch repair; however, the mid-term outcomes, including the survival, of the frail patients were significantly worse than those of the non-frail patients, mostly because of non-aorta-related causes.

Cost analysis of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in octogenarians: analysis from a single Japanese center.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has revolutionized the prognosis of intermediate- or high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, particularly among older adults. However, in possible candidates for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), the implantation of expensive prostheses may be questionable in an era when healthcare costs are becoming a major concern. In this retrospective analysis of a single Japanese center, we focused on patients aged over 80 years; the objectives of this study were: (1) to compare TAVR and SAVR in terms of total hospitalization costs and (2) to describe the itemized cost of TAVR and SAVR to identify patients aged over 80 years in whom TAVR or SAVR would be cost-effective. A total of 146 patients aged over 80 years who underwent TAVR or SAVR for severe aortic stenosis were included. These patients were divided into a high-risk group (Society of Thoracic Surgeons [STS] mortality score > 8%; 36: TAVR and 12: SAVR) with 48 patients and a non-high-risk group (STS mortality score < 8%; 45: TAVR and 53 SAVR) with 98 patients. No 30-day mortality was observed in either group. In both groups, postoperative intensive care unit stay and hospital stay were longer with SAVR than with TAVR. In the non-high-risk group, the total cost was comparable for TAVR and SAVR; however, in the high-risk group, the total cost was significantly higher with SAVR than that with TAVR. A breakdown analysis of the total cost in the high-risk group showed both pre- and postoperative costs to be significantly higher with SAVR than with TAVR; however, operative costs were higher with TAVR. Up to 3 years, the overall survival in both groups did not significantly differ between TAVR and SAVR. Our findings suggest that from the perspective of total medical costs, TAVR is more suitable than SAVR for high-risk older adults.