Strategy for acute DeBakey type I aortic dissection considering midterm results: a retrospective cohort study comparing ascending aortic replacement and total arch replacement with frozen elephant trunk technique

Abstract

Abstract Background Acute type A aortic dissection is treated with an emergency procedure that uses ascending aortic replacement (AAR). However, to avoid a residual dissected aorta with a false lumen, total arch replacement (TAR) is required. The frozen elephant trunk (FET) technique is a promising surgical approach that promotes false lumen obliteration in a single step. Therefore, this retrospective single-center study aimed to evaluate the operative outcomes of AAR and TAR with FET. Methods Between 2007 and 2021, 143 patients with acute DeBakey type I aortic dissection underwent a central repair using AAR (n = 95) or TAR with FET (n = 43). All perioperative variables, the duration of all-cause mortality, and aortic events defined as dilatation of the distal aorta > 5 cm, new occurrences of aortic dissection, distal aortic surgery, and distal aortic rupture were recorded. We compared these perioperative variables and mid-term results with an additional focus on distal aortic events. Results Patient background data did not differ between the two groups. Perioperative results for the TAR with FET group vs the AAR group showed similar operative times (306 vs 298 min, P = 0.862), but the TAR group had longer cardiopulmonary bypass times (154 vs 179 min, P < 0.001). The freedom from all-cause death for the TAR vs AAR groups using the Kaplan–Meier method was 81.9% vs 85.4% and 78.0% vs 85.4% (P = 0.407) at 1 and 3 years, respectively. Freedom from aorta-related events was 90.6% vs 97.6% and 69.3% vs 87.0% (P = 0.034) at 1 and 3 years, respectively. Conclusions TAR with FET had comparable perioperative results to AAR in acute DeBakey type I aortic dissection and was considered a valuable method to avoid aorta-related events in the midterm.