Search

Objective: The number of octogenarians undergoing emergency surgery is increasing and may negate the impact of the beneficial advances. The aim of this study was to review octogenarians with type A acute aortic dissection and assess the prognosis., Methods: Fifty-eight patients with acute aortic dissection, whose average age was 83.2 years, were divided into 2 groups: Group I comprised 30 patients who underwent emergency surgery, and group II comprised 28 patients who were treated conservatively. We compared the 2 groups in terms of mortality and morbidity., Results: In group I, postoperative hospital mortality was 13.3% (4 patients). In group II, 17 patients (60.7%) died in the hospital. In group I, although emergency aortic replacement was successfully completed, 5 patients became bedridden after surgery and 2 patients died of pneumonia or stroke in the early stages of institutional care. Thirteen patients in group I died of malignancies, abdominal aortic rupture, traffic accident, heart failure, or late-stage senility in later phase. There was no difference in actuarial survivals at 5 years, which were 48.5% in group I and 35.4% in group II., Conclusion: Emergency surgery for octogenarians with acute aortic dissection showed acceptable mortality. However, families had to take responsibility for patients who experienced unconsciousness, had dementia, or became bedridden. It is important to have consensus between the family and surgeons about emergency surgical treatment for octogenarians.

Background: The long-term outcome of medical treatment in patients with type B acute aortic dissection (BAD) was assessed and predictors of early in-hospital death were investigated, as well as the need for surgical intervention., Methods and Results: In the past 11 years, 180 patients were admitted to hospital and medically treated at the time of onset. If the maximum diameter of the dissected aorta exceeded 60 mm, or rapid enlargement or vital organ ischemia were identified, early or elective surgery was performed. Emergency operation was required in 7 patients. Elective surgery was required for 31 patients (19.1%). The operation-free rate was 76.0% at 10 years. Actuarial survival rate was 89.4% at 5 years and 71.8% at 10 years. Multivariate analysis indicated that refractory hypertension (odds ratio (OR), 4.08, 95% confidence interval (CI), 3.06-21.44, p=0.0434) and rupture (OR 5.87, 95% CI, 2.21-9.12, p=0.0154) were predictors of early hospital mortality. The only significant predictor for elective surgery was a maximum diameter exceeding 40 mm at the time of onset (OR 13.4, 95% CI, 1.93-6.89, p=0.0003)., Conclusions: Medical treatment for BAD produced good results. Strict control of blood pressure is important for patients with a dissected aortic diameter exceeding 40 mm at the time of onset.

An 84-year-old woman was hospitalized in hemodynamic shock due to type A acute aortic dissection (AAD) complicated by pulseless tamponade. She was treated conservatively as her family refused emergency surgery. In spite of warning her family that lack of intervention may possibly lead to an early death, she gradually improved and went home without any further problems. Emergency surgery for octogenarians remains controversial, however. We report the first surviving, non-operative case of an octogenarian with pulseless shock due to aortic dissection.

A 52 year-old man underwent aortic valve replacement and ascending aortic replacement (Wheat procedure) for acute dissection (Stanford type A) and aortic regurgitation (grade 3/4). At that time, the aortic root was slightly dilated at about 45 mm and the descending aorta was within a normal range at about 35 mm. Forty months after the initial operation, a follow-up chest enhanced computed tomography showed an aortic root aneurysm about 60 mm in diameter, a thoracic aortic aneurysm about 70 mm in diameter and chronic aortic dissection. First we performed the Bentall procedure, innominate artery and left common carotid artery replacement by 12 mm, and 10 mm Hemashield grafts during selective cerebral perfusion. After 10 weeks, we carried out aortic arch, descending aorta and left subclavian artery replacement. The postoperative course was uneventful and postoperative examination demonstrated a good surgical result. Histological findings of the aortic aneurysm wall showed cystic medial necrosis, but Marfan's syndrome was excluded clinically. We could diagnose aortic root aneurysm by regular follow-up chest enhanced computed tomography (CT) and echocardiography. Therefore, cases with slight dilation of the aortic root in the Wheat procedure should undergo regular follow-up evaluation by chest enhanced CT and echocardiography.

Aortic dissection etiology involve many factors that are difficult to identify clearly. We report a 47-year-old man who underwent a Bentall operation with reattachment of bypass grafts for a dissecting aneurysm (DeBakey type II) 4 years after combined triple coronary artery bypass grafting and mitral valve replacement. This case appeared to be associated with factors leading to dissecting aneurysm although it remains unclear which was more influential congenital bicuspid aortic valve or proximal anastomosis of venous grafts or both. This case suggests the need to consider appropriate timing in surgical intervention for cases of congenital bicuspid aortic valves and the selection of additional aortic valve replacement in initial surgery.