Carlo de Vincentiis

Role of age in acute type A aortic dissection outcome: report from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD).

OBJECTIVE The increasing life expectancy of the population will likely be accompanied by a rise in the incidence of acute type A aortic dissection. However, because of an increased risk of cardiac surgery in an elderly population, it is important to define when, if at all, the risks of aortic repair outweigh the risk of death from unoperated type A aortic dissection. METHODS We analyzed 936 patients with type A aortic dissection enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection from 1996 to 2004. Patients with type A aortic dissection were categorized according to patient age by decade and by surgical versus medical management, and outcomes of both management types were investigated in the different age groups. RESULTS The rate of surgical aortic repair decreased progressively with age, whereas surgical mortality significantly increased with age. Age 70 years or more was an independent predictor for mortality (38.2% vs 26.0%; P < .0001, odds ratio 1.73). The in-hospital mortality rate was significantly lower after surgical management compared with medical management until the age of 80 years. For patients aged 80 to 90 years, the in-hospital mortality appeared to be lower after surgical management (37.9% vs 55.2%; P = .188); however, this failed to reach clinical significance owing to the limited patient number in this age group. CONCLUSIONS Although the surgical mortality significantly increased with increased age, surgical management was still associated with significantly lower in-hospital mortality rates compared with medical management until the age of 80 years. Surgery may decrease the in-hospital mortality rate for octogenarians with type A aortic dissection and might be considered in all patients with type A aortic dissection regardless of age.

Aortic Valve Replacement in Octogenarians: Is Biologic Valve the Unique Solution?

BACKGROUND This study analyzed morbidity, mortality, and quality of life after aortic valve replacement with mechanical and biologic prostheses in octogenarian patients. METHODS A retrospective analysis was performed in 345 consecutive patients, mean age of 82 +/- 2 years (range, 80 to 92), who had aortic valve replacement from May 1991 to April 2005. A bioprosthesis (group I) was used in 200 patients (58%), and 145 (42%) received a mechanical prosthesis (group II). Associated cardiac procedures were done in 211 patients (61%), of which 71% were coronary artery bypass grafting. Patients had symptomatic aortic stenosis (84.3%) or associated aortic insufficiency; 88% were in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III or IV. The mean preoperative aortic valve gradient was 62 +/- 16 mm Hg (range, 25 to 122 mm Hg). The mean left ventricular ejection fraction was good (0.52 +/- 0.12); 30 patients (8.7%) had an ejection fraction of less than 0.30. RESULTS The in-hospital mortality rate was 7.5% (26 patients); 17 (8.5%) in group I and 9 (6.2%) in group II (p = 0.536) Significant predictors of operative mortality were preoperative renal insufficiency (blood creatinine > 2.00 mg/mL) and need for urgent operation. Mean follow-up, complete at 100%, was 40 +/- 33 months (range, 1 to 176 months). Long-term follow-up, using Kaplan-Meier analysis, showed an overall survival of 61% at 5 years and 21% at 10 years; survival by type of prosthesis was significantly higher with mechanical prostheses (log-rank p = 0.03). Freedom from cerebrovascular events (thromboembolic/hemorrhagic) at 5 and 10 years was 89% and 62% in the mechanical group and 92% and 77% in the biologic group (p = 0.76). Postoperative NYHA functional class was I or II in 96% of patients. Quality-of-life scores were excellent considering the age of the patients. No differences were found between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS Surgical treatment for symptomatic aortic stenosis in octogenarians has an acceptable operative risk with excellent long-term results and good quality of life. In this cohort, survival rate is slightly but significantly higher with mechanical prostheses.

Accuracy, calibration and clinical performance of the new EuroSCORE II risk stratification system

OBJECTIVES The European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) has been used for many years since its introduction in 1999. Recently, a new EuroSCORE (EuroSCORE II) has been developed to update the previous version. The EuroSCORE II includes some different predictors and/or introduces a new classification of the already existing predictors. This study presents a validation series for the EuroSCORE II compared with the previous additive and the logistic EuroSCORE and with the Age, Creatinine and Ejection Fraction (ACEF) score. METHODS A total of 1090 consecutive adult patients operated on at our institution from September 2010 to October 2011 were admitted to this retrospective study. All the patients received a risk stratification based on the EuroSCORE II and the other scores considered. Accuracy, calibration and clinical performance of the various risk models were assessed. RESULTS The accuracy of the EuroSCORE II was good (c-statistic 0.81) but not significantly higher than the other scores (range 0.78-0.8). Calibration at the Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic was good for all the scores; the difference between observed (3.75%) and predicted mortality in the overall population was not significant for the EuroSCORE II (3.1%) and the ACEF score (3.4%), whereas the additive EuroSCORE (5.8%) and the logistic EuroSCORE (7.3%) significantly overestimated the risk. In patients at low, mild moderate and high mortality risk, the EuroSCORE II provided a risk prediction not significantly different from the observed mortality rate, whereas in very high-risk patients (observed mortality rate 11%), it significantly underestimated (6.5%) the mortality risk. The accuracy of the EuroSCORE II was acceptable in isolated coronary surgery, and good or excellent in the other operations. CONCLUSIONS The EuroSCORE II represents a useful update of the previous EuroSCORE version, with a much better clinical performance and the same good level of accuracy. It is possible that for the risk stratification of very high-risk patients, other factors (rare but associated with a mortality rate >50%) should be included in the future models.

A randomized controlled trial of preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump in coronary patients with poor left ventricular function undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery*.

Objective:Preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump use in high-risk patients undergoing surgical coronary revascularization is still a matter of debate. The objective of this study is to determine whether the preoperative use of an intra-aortic balloon pump improves the outcome after coronary operations in high-risk patients. Design:Single-center prospective randomized controlled trial. Setting:Tertiary cardiac surgery center, research hospital. Patients:One hundred ten subjects undergoing coronary operations, with a poor left ventricular ejection fraction (< 35%) and no hemodynamic instability. Interventions:Patients randomized to receive preincision intra-aortic balloon pump or no intervention. Measurements and Main Results:The primary outcome measurement was postoperative major morbidity rate, defined as one of prolonged mechanical ventilation, stroke, acute kidney injury, surgical revision, mediastinitis, and operative mortality. There was no difference in major morbidity rate (40% in intra-aortic balloon pump group and 31% in control group; odds ratio, 1.49 [95% CI, 0.68–3.33]). No differences were observed for cardiac index before and after the operation; at the arrival in the ICU, patients in the intra-aortic balloon pump group had a significantly (p = 0.01) lower mean systemic arterial pressure (80.1 ± 15.1 mm Hg) versus control group patients (89.2 ± 17.9 mm Hg). Fewer patients in the intra-aortic balloon pump group (24%) than those in the control group (44%) required dopamine infusion (p = 0.043). Conclusions:This study demonstrates that in patients undergoing nonemergent coronary operations, with a stable hemodynamic profile and a left ventricular ejection fraction less than 35%, the preincision insertion of intra-aortic balloon pump does not result in a better outcome. Given the possible complications of intra-aortic balloon pump insertion, and the additional cost of the procedure, this approach is not justified.

Effects of surgical ventricular reconstruction on diastolic function at midterm follow-up

OBJECTIVE Limited data are available on the effects of surgical ventricular reconstruction on diastolic function. The aim of the present study was to evaluate changes in diastolic function induced by surgical ventricular reconstruction at 2 time intervals after surgery (discharge and follow-up) and to assess the impact of diastolic changes on clinical outcome. METHODS A total of 129 patients (65 +/- 9 years, 14 women) underwent echocardiographic Doppler evaluation before surgical ventricular reconstruction, at discharge, and at follow-up (median 7 months). Patients with mitral regurgitation were excluded. Diastolic pattern was graded as follows: 0 (normal), 1 (abnormal relaxation), 2 (pseudo normalization), 3 (restrictive, reversible), and 4 (restrictive, irreversible). RESULTS At follow-up, 28 (21.7%) of 129 patients showed a restrictive diastolic pattern (grade 3-4; group 1) and 101 did not (diastolic pattern grade 0-2; group 2). Preoperative and postoperative factors strongly associated with late diastolic restriction included sphericity index (higher in group 1), ventricular shape (nonaneurysmal shape more frequent in group 1), internal dimensions (greater in group 1), diastolic pattern (higher in group 1), ejection fraction (lower in group 1); left atrial dimensions (greater in group 1); mitral regurgitation rate (higher in group 1). At multivariate analysis the most powerful predictors of restriction were preoperative pseudonormalization of diastolic pattern (diastolic pattern 2) and septolateral dimensions (short axis). Overall, ejection fraction improved from 33% +/- 9% to 40% +/- 9% to 40% +/- 9%; P = .001; end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes decreased (112 +/- 41 to 73 +/- 21 to 88 +/- 28 mL/m(2), respectively; P = .001; and 77 +/- 38 to 44 +/- 17 to 52 +/- 24 mL/m(2), respectively; P = .001); New York Heart Association class improved (2.4 +/- 0.8 to 1.6 +/- 0.6; P = .001). CONCLUSIONS Mild preoperative diastolic dysfunction (pseudonormalized pattern) and increased septolateral dimensions are independent predictors of diastolic restriction after surgical ventricular reconstruction.

A Case of Fatal Bleeding Following Emergency Surgery on an Ascending Aorta Intramural Hematoma in a Patient Taking Dabigatran.

From the Departments of *Cardiothoracic Vascular Anesthesia and Intensive Care; and the †Cardiac Surgery, Great Vessels Disease, IRCCS Policlinico, San Donato Milanese, Italy. Address reprint requests to Giulia Beatrice Crapelli, MD, Department of Cardiothoracic-vascular Anesthesia and ICU, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097 San Donato Milanese. E-mail: giulia.crapelli@gmail.com

Postoperative myocardial infarction in acute type A aortic dissection: A report from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection

Objective: Postoperative myocardial infarction remains a serious complication in cardiac surgery. The incidence and impact of this condition in acute type A aortic dissection are poorly understood. Methods: A total of 1445 patients with acute type A aortic dissection who underwent surgery were enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection from 1996 to 2013. Individuals with preoperative myocardial infarction at hospital presentation and a history of myocardial infarction were excluded. Patients with postoperative myocardial infarction (n = 38, 2.6%) were compared with those without postoperative myocardial infarction (n = 1407, 97.4%). Results: The postoperative myocardial infarction group was more often of white race (100% vs 90%, P = .043) with bicuspid aortic valve (15.6% vs 4.5%, P = .015). Imaging demonstrated more aortic root involvement (75.8% vs 49.5%, P = .003), pericardial effusion (65.5% vs 44.1%, P = .022), and coronary artery compromise (27.3% vs 10.2%, P = .022). Patients with postoperative myocardial infarction were more frequently hypotensive or in shock during surgery (42.9% vs 25.5%, P = .021). Patients with postoperative myocardial infarction were more likely to have undergone root replacement (54.5% vs 33.3%, P = .011), coronary artery bypass grafting (28.6% vs 7.4%, P < .001), or aortic valve replacement (40.0% vs 23.8%, P = .027), and less likely to have had complete arch replacement (2.8% vs 14.0%, P = .050). Median circulatory arrest time was higher in postoperative myocardial infarction (60 vs 38 minutes, P = .024). In‐hospital mortality (57.9% vs 16.3%, P < .001) and Kaplan–Meier estimates of 5‐year mortality (P = .007) were distinctly higher in postoperative myocardial infarction. Conclusions: Postoperative myocardial infarction is a devastating complication of type A aortic dissection repair. It is associated with bicuspid aortic valve, root involvement, pericardial effusion, and extent of surgical repair. Patients with postoperative myocardial infarction have higher serious postoperative complications, in‐hospital mortality, and 5‐year mortality rates than those without postoperative myocardial infarction.

Emergent treatment of aortic rupture in acute type B dissection

Massive left hemothorax is a rare and dramatic complication of acute type B aortic dissection. The primary endpoint is to treat the aortic rupture, stop the bleeding and stabilize the hemodynamic status, with the aim to prevent mortality and major cardiac, cerebral, visceral and renal complications. Thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) is the most frequent management, although its planning, in these emergent patients, may be very difficult and sub-optimal imaging may result at post-operative examination (CT and MRI). In case of TEVAR is not the definitive treatment of the aortic disease, a second stage surgical management can be performed in elective status, in a patient with a total clinical recover. In acute and dramatic circumstances, like ruptured type B dissection, TEVAR is a valid and suitable bridge procedure to open surgery, reducing the overall risk for mortality and major complications.

Aortic dissection in patients with Marfan syndrome based on the IRAD data

Between January 1996 and May 2017, the International Registry on Acute Aortic Dissections has collected information on a total of 6,424 consecutive patients with acute aortic dissection, including 258 individuals with a diagnosis of Marfan syndrome. Patients with Marfan syndrome presented at a significantly younger age compared to patients without Marfan syndrome (38.2±13.2 vs. 63.0±14.0 years; P<0.001) and in general had fewer comorbidities, although they more frequently had a known aortic aneurysm and history of prior cardiac surgery. We noted significantly larger diameters of the aortic annulus and root in the Marfan syndrome cohort, but no larger diameters more distally. The in-hospital mortality in type A dissection was not significantly different in patients with or without Marfan syndrome, despite the differences in age and comorbidities and the lower incidence of aortic rupture in the Marfan syndrome cohort. In contrast, the in-hospital mortality of Marfan syndrome patients with type B dissection appears to be lower than that of patients without Marfan syndrome. The Marfan syndrome cohort that was treated with open surgery for type B dissection seemed to do especially well, with a 0% mortality rate (n=27). Follow-up data for type A and B dissections combined show an estimated five-year survival rate of 80.1% and an estimated reintervention rate of 55.3% in patients with Marfan syndrome. Such a high rate of reinterventions highlights the need for careful surveillance and treatment for patients with Marfan syndrome surviving the acute phase of aortic dissection.

The ACEF II Risk Score for cardiac surgery: updated but still parsimonious

Aims The age, creatinine, and ejection fraction (ACEF) score was introduced in 2009 and is presently included in the guidelines for myocardial revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology and Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery as a risk stratification tool for surgical and percutaneous myocardial revascularization. The present study introduces an updated version of the ACEF (ACEF II) inclusive of emergency surgery and pre-operative anaemia. Methods and results The development series includes 7011 consecutive cardiac surgery patients operated at a single institution. The validation series includes 1687 consecutive cardiac surgery patients operated in a different institution. The five factors included in the ACEF II were assessed in a multivariable logistic regression model testing their independent role as predictors of operative (in hospital or 30 days after surgery) mortality. Based on the odds ratio of each predictor, the ACEF II score is calculated as age(years)/ejection fraction (%). Additional points are attributed to a serum creatinine level > 2 mg/dL (2 points), emergency surgery (3 points) and anaemia [haematocrit (HCT) < 36%, 0.2 points per each HCT point below 36%]. The final model was well calibrated. Discrimination of the ACEF II (c-statistics 0.814) was significantly (P = 0.041) better than the ACEF (c-statistics 0.773) and equal to the EuroSCORE II. In the external validation, the ACEF II confirmed a better discrimination than the ACEF and good calibration properties. Conclusion The ACEF II allows the inclusion of emergency patients and, through a re-modulation of the coefficients and the inclusion of anaemia, appears more adequate to the present cardiac surgery scenario.