Unilateral Is Comparable to Bilateral Antegrade Cerebral Perfusion in Acute Type A Aortic Dissection Repair
Objective
To compare the short- and long-term outcomes of unilateral and bilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion (uni-ACP and bi-ACP) in acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) repair.
Methods
From 2001 to 2017, 307 patients underwent surgical repair of an ATAAD using uni-ACP (n = 140) and bi-ACP (n = 167). Data were collected through the Department of Cardiac Surgery Data Warehouse, medical record review, and the National Death Index database.
Results
The demographics and preoperative comorbidities were similar between the uni-ACP and bi-ACP groups. Both groups had similar rates of procedures for aortic valve/root, ascending aorta, frozen elephant trunk, and other concomitant procedures. Perioperative outcomes were not significantly different between the 2 groups (30-day mortality: uni-ACP 3.4% vs bi-ACP 7.8%, P = .12) except reoperation for bleeding was significantly lower in uni-ACP (5% vs 12%, P = .03). Between the uni-ACP and bi-ACP groups, overall postoperative stroke rate (6% vs 9%, P = .4) and left brain stroke rate (0.7% vs 3.0%, P = .23) were not significantly different. The odds ratio of uni-ACP versus bi-ACP was 0.87 (P = .80) for postoperative stroke and 0.86 (P = .81) for operative mortality. The mid-term survival was better in the uni-ACP group, P = .027 (5-year: 84% vs 76%). The hazard ratio of all-time mortality for uni-ACP versus bi-ACP was 0.74 (95% confidence interval, 0.33-1.65), P = .46.
Conclusions
In ATAAD, both uni-ACP and bi-ACP are equally effective to protect the brain with low postoperative stroke rates and mortality in hemiarch to zone 3 arch replacement. Uni-ACP is recommended for its simplicity and less manipulation of arch branch vessels.
