Background The decision to conserve or replace the native aortic valve following acute type-A aortic dissection (ATAAD) is an area of cardiac surgery without standardised practice. This single centre retrospective study analysed the long-term performance of the native aortic valve and root following surgery for ATAAD. Methods Between 2009 and 2018 all cases ATAAD treated at Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust were analysed. Patients were divided into 2 groups: a) ascending aorta (interposition) graft (AAG) without valve replacement; and b) non-valve-sparing aortic root replacement (ARR). Pre-operative covariates were compared, as well as operative characteristics and post-operative complications. Long-term survival and echocardiographic outcomes were analysed using regression analysis. Results In total, 116 patients were included: 63 patients in the AAG group and 53 patients in the ARR group. In patients where the native aortic valve was conserved, 9 developed severe aortic regurgitation and 2 patients developed dilation of the aortic root requiring subsequent replacement during the follow-up period. Aortic regurgitation at presentation was not found to be associated with subsequent risk of developing severe aortic regurgitation or reintervention on the aortic valve. Overall mortality was observed to be significantly lower in patients undergoing AAG (17.5% vs. 41.5%, p=0.004). Conclusions With careful patient selection, the native aortic root shows good long-term durability both in terms of valve competence and stable root dimensions after surgery for ATAAD. This study supports the consideration of conservation of the aortic valve during emergency surgery for type-A dissection, in the absence of a definitive indication for root replacement, including in cases where aortic regurgitation complicates the presentation.

Background The coronavirus-disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic imposed an unprecedented burden on the provision of cardiac surgical services. The reallocation of workforce and resources necessitated the postponement of elective operations in this cohort of high-risk patients. We investigated the impact of this outbreak on the aortic valve surgery activity at a single two-site centre in the United Kingdom. Methods and Results Data were extracted from the local surgical database, including the demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of patients operated on from March 2020 to May 2020 and compared with the respective 2019 period. The experience of centres world-wide was invoked to assess the efficiency of our services. There was a 38.2% reduction in the total number of operations with a 70% reduction in elective cases, compared with a 159% increase in urgent and emergency operations. The attendant surgical risk was significantly higher [median Euroscore II was 2.7 [1.9-5.2] in 2020 versus 2.1 [0.9-3.7] in 2019 (p=0.005)] but neither 30-day survival nor freedom from major post-operative complications (re-sternotomy for bleeding/tamponade, transient ischemic attack/stroke, renal replacement therapy) was compromised (p>0.05 for all comparisons). Conclusion RBHT managed to offer a considerable volume of aortic valve surgical activity over the first COVID-19 outbreak to a cohort of higher-risk patients, without compromising post-operative outcomes. A backlog of elective cases is expected to develop, the accommodation of which after surgical activity normalisation will be crucial to monitor.

Background Porcine aortic roots (PAR) have been reported in the literature with acceptable short and long-term outcomes for the treatment of aortic root aneurysms. However, their efficacy in type A aortic dissection (TAAD) is yet to be defined. Methods Using data from a locally collated aortic dissection registry, we compared the outcomes in patients undergoing aortic root replacement for TAAD using either of two surgical options: i) PAR or ii) composite valve grafts (CVG). A retrospective analysis was conducted for all procedures in the period 2005-2018. Results A total of 252 patients underwent procedures for TAAD in the time period. Sixty-five patients had aortic root replacements (PAR n=30, CVG n=35). Between group comparisons identified a younger CVG group (50.5 vs 64.5, p<0.05) although all other covariates were comparable. Operative parameters were comparable between the two groups. The use of PAR did not significantly impact operative mortality (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.22-3.61, p=0.992), stroke (OR 2.91, 0.25 – 34.09, p=0.395), re-operation (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.22 – 3.62, p=0.882) or length of stay (coef 2.33, -8.23 – 12.90, p=0.659) compared to CVG. Five-year survival was similar between both groups (PAR 59% vs CVG 69%, p=0.153) and re-operation was negligible. Echocardiography revealed significantly lower aortic valve gradients in the PAR group (8.69 vs 15.45 mmHg, p<0.0001), and smaller left ventricular dimensions both at 6 weeks and 1 year follow up (p<0.05). Conclusions This study highlights the comparable short and mid-term outcomes of PAR in cases of TAAD, in comparison to established therapy.