Treatment strategies and outcomes following acute type A aortic dissection repair in patients with bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valves: A meta-analysis

Tomonari Shimoda MD , Yujiro Yokoyama MD , Hisato Takagi MD, PhD , Toshiki Kuno MD, PhD , Shinichi Fukuhara MD
{"title":"Treatment strategies and outcomes following acute type A aortic dissection repair in patients with bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valves: A meta-analysis","authors":"Tomonari Shimoda MD ,&nbsp;Yujiro Yokoyama MD ,&nbsp;Hisato Takagi MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Toshiki Kuno MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Shinichi Fukuhara MD","doi":"10.1016/j.xjon.2024.02.020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>There is no consensus regarding the strategies for repairing acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV). This meta-analysis aimed to compare the treatment strategies and outcomes of ATAAD repair between patients with BAV and those with tricuspid aortic valve (TAV).</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A systematic review of databases were performed from inception through March 2023. The primary outcome of interest was all-cause mortality, with a minimum follow-up of 1 year. The secondary outcomes of interest included ratios of performed procedures and rate of distal aortic reoperation. Data were extracted, and pooled analysis was performed using a random-effects model.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Eight observational studies including a total of 3701 patients (BAV, n = 349; TAV, n = 3352) were selected for a meta-analysis. Concerning proximal aortic procedures, BAV patients exhibited a higher incidence of necessary root replacement (odds ratio [OR], 6.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.84 to 11.09; <em>P</em> &lt; .01). Regarding distal aortic procedures, extended arch replacement was performed less frequently in BAV patients (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.99; <em>P</em> = .04), whereas hemiarch procedure rates were comparable in the 2 groups. All-cause mortality was lower in the BAV group (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.92; <em>P</em> = .01). Distal aortic reoperation rates were comparable in the 2 groups.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This study highlights distinct procedural patterns in ATAAD patients with BAV and TAV. Despite differing baseline characteristics, BAV patients exhibited superior survival compared to TAV patients, with comparable distal aortic reoperation rates. These findings may be useful for decision making regarding limited versus extended aortic arch repair.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":74032,"journal":{"name":"JTCVS open","volume":"19 ","pages":"Pages 9-30"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266627362400055X/pdfft?md5=335b6bf1280c8c974a01e9c4e042a3e4&pid=1-s2.0-S266627362400055X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JTCVS open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266627362400055X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

There is no consensus regarding the strategies for repairing acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV). This meta-analysis aimed to compare the treatment strategies and outcomes of ATAAD repair between patients with BAV and those with tricuspid aortic valve (TAV).

Methods

A systematic review of databases were performed from inception through March 2023. The primary outcome of interest was all-cause mortality, with a minimum follow-up of 1 year. The secondary outcomes of interest included ratios of performed procedures and rate of distal aortic reoperation. Data were extracted, and pooled analysis was performed using a random-effects model.

Results

Eight observational studies including a total of 3701 patients (BAV, n = 349; TAV, n = 3352) were selected for a meta-analysis. Concerning proximal aortic procedures, BAV patients exhibited a higher incidence of necessary root replacement (odds ratio [OR], 6.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.84 to 11.09; P < .01). Regarding distal aortic procedures, extended arch replacement was performed less frequently in BAV patients (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.99; P = .04), whereas hemiarch procedure rates were comparable in the 2 groups. All-cause mortality was lower in the BAV group (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.92; P = .01). Distal aortic reoperation rates were comparable in the 2 groups.

Conclusions

This study highlights distinct procedural patterns in ATAAD patients with BAV and TAV. Despite differing baseline characteristics, BAV patients exhibited superior survival compared to TAV patients, with comparable distal aortic reoperation rates. These findings may be useful for decision making regarding limited versus extended aortic arch repair.

Abstract Image

二尖瓣和三尖瓣主动脉瓣患者急性 A 型主动脉夹层修复术后的治疗策略和疗效:元分析
背景关于修复双尖瓣主动脉瓣(BAV)患者急性A型主动脉夹层(ATAAD)的策略尚未达成共识。本荟萃分析旨在比较双主动脉瓣患者和三尖瓣主动脉瓣(TAV)患者的治疗策略和 ATAAD 修复的结果。主要研究结果为全因死亡率,随访时间至少为 1 年。次要研究结果包括手术比例和远端主动脉再手术率。结果8项观察性研究共纳入3701名患者(BAV,n = 349;TAV,n = 3352)进行荟萃分析。就近端主动脉手术而言,BAV 患者进行必要的主动脉根部置换的发生率更高(几率比 [OR],6.53;95% 置信区间 [CI],3.84 至 11.09;P < .01)。在主动脉远端手术方面,BAV患者较少进行扩弓置换术(OR,0.69;95% CI,0.49 至 0.99;P = .04),而两组患者的半弓手术率相当。BAV组的全因死亡率较低(危险比为0.68;95% CI为0.50至0.92;P = .01)。两组患者的远端主动脉再手术率相当。尽管基线特征不同,BAV 患者的存活率高于 TAV 患者,但远端主动脉再手术率相当。这些发现可能有助于就有限主动脉弓修复与扩大主动脉弓修复做出决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信