Aortic dissection is a catastrophic emergency with a high mortality rate, and its full pathogenesis remains unknown to researchers, which brings a heavy burden to the individuals, society and family because of its poor prognosis. Improving the efficiency of its diagnosis and treatment and defining the pathogenic mechanism clearly is a research hotspot. Recently, utilizing bioinformatics to find diagnostic biomarker of aortic dissection has attracted the attention of many researchers. Besides, exploring the relationship between pathogenic mechanism and inflammatory process, extracellular matrix degradation, elastic fiber fracture and the phenotypic transformation of vascular smooth muscle cells is also a hot topic. We summarize recent progress made in the pathogenesis of aortic dissection. We hope to identify key molecules driving aortic dissection and provide reliable reference for the diagnosis, medical treatment and prevention of aortic dissection.
Objective To compare the early and late outcomes of different techniques of proximal root reconstruction during the repair of acute type A aortic dissection, including aortic valve (AV) resuspension, isolated supracoronary ascending aorta replacement, and aortic root replacement procedure (Bentall). Methods All patients who underwent acute Type A aortic dissection repair between January 2010 and December 2015 in Fuwai Hospital were retrospectively analyzed in our study. There were 673 patients with 512 males and 161 females at mean age of 48.80±11.22 years. There were 403 patients as an AV resuspension group (287 males and 116 females at average age of 50.61±9.95 years), 95 patients as an isolated supracoronary ascending aorta replacement group (76 males and 19 females at average of 49.83±12.21 years), and 175 patients as an AV resuspension group (149 males and 26 females at average of 44.07±11.99 years). The differences of preoperative aortic insufficiency, intraoperative variables and postoperative aortic insufficiency were compared in the three groups. Results Five hundred ninety-one patients (87.8%) had aortic valve commissure involved. The proportion of mild degree, moderate degree, and severe degree among the three groups were statistically significant (31.7%, 52.4%, 15.9%; 87.4%, 12.6%, 0.0%; 23.4%, 56.0%, 20.6%; P < 0.01). The diameter of aortic sinus in the three groups was 39.06±5.11 mm, 38.27±4.41 mm, 50.39±6.22 mm, respectively, with a statistical difference ( P< 0.01). The duration of surgery, cardiopulmonary bypass time, aorta cross-clamp time were also statistically significant (P < 0.01). The in-hospital mortality was 11.73% in the whole group. There was no difference among the three groups (12.2% vs. 13.7% vs. 9.7%, P=0.58). Five-year survival rate was similar (83.06% vs. 81.27% vs. 83.05%, P=0.85). The 5-year free from over moderate aortic insufficiency rate were 95.2%, 98.6% and 100% respectively, with no statistical difference (P=0.07). There was no re-do operation for aortic root diseases in the whole group. Conclusion According to aortic root processing strategy in our center, AV resuspension, isolated supracoronary ascending aorta replacement, and aortic root replacement can achieve satisfactory results. However, there is higher incidence of aortic insufficiency through AV resuspension. Further study is needed to evaluate its efficacy.
ObjectiveTo discuss the efficacy of type Ⅱ hybrid aortic arch repair for type A aortic dissection in patients of different age groups.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 126 patients with type A aortic dissection admitted to the Fuwai Hospital between January 2016 and December 2018, including 78 (61.9%) males and 48 (38.1%) females, with an average age of 61.8±6.9 years. The patients were divided into an elderly group (≥60 years, n=82) and a non-elderly group (<60 years, n=44). The preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative data of patients in the two groups were compared.ResultsThe age between the elderly and non-elderly group was significantly different (65.9±4.1 years vs. 54.3±4.1 years, P<0.010), and no significant difference was found between the two groups in other preoperative baseline data. There were 6 (4.8%) patients of early death, 3 (2.4%) patients of stroke and 2 (1.6%) patients of paralysis. A total of 194 stents were implanted, and the average dimeter of the stents was 33.6±1.8 mm and the average length was 199.0±6.7 mm. The non-elderly group had shorter mechanical ventilation time (31.9±41.7 h vs. 61.0±89.2 h, P=0.043) and ICU stay time (77.8±51.4 h vs. 143.1±114.4 h, P<0.001) than the elderly group. There was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality rate, reoperation rate or survival rate between the two groups (P>0.05). Follow-up time was 1-43 (22.6±10.8) months, and 3 patients were lost. There were 104 (82.5%) patients of complete thrombus formation of false lumen in stent and endoleak was reported in 11 (9.2%) patients.ConclusionType Ⅱ hybrid aortic arch repair offers an alternative approach to acute type A aortic dissection with acceptable early and mid-term clinical effects. The non-elderly patients have a similar early treatment effect to the elderly patients, but have a better mid-term outcome.