Wahaj Munir

and 3 more

Background: Acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD), is a surgical emergency often requiring intervention on the aortic root. There is much controversy regarding root management; aggressively pursuing a root replacement, versus more conservative approaches to preserve native structures. Methods: Electronic database search we performed through PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, google scholar and Cochrane identifying studies that reported on outcomes of surgical repair of ATAAD through either root preservation or replacement. The identified articles focused on short- and long-term mortalities, and rates of re-operation on the aortic root. Results: There remains controversy on replacing or preserving aortic root in ATAAD. Current evidence supports practice of both trends following an extensive decision-making framework, with conflicting series suggesting favourable results with both procedures as the approach that best defines higher survival rates and lower perioperative complications. Yet, the decision to perform either approach remains surgeon decision and bound to the extent of the dissection and tear entries in strong correlation with status of the aortic valve and involvement of coronaries in the dissection. Conclusions: There exists much controversy regarding fate of the aortic root in ATAAD. There are conflicting studies for impact of root replacement on mortality, whilst some study’s report no significant results at all. There is strong evidence regarding risk of re-operation being greater when root is not replaced. Majority of these studies are limited by the single centred, retrospective nature of these small sample sized cohorts, further hindered by potential of treatment bias.

Mohammed Idhrees

and 3 more

Background: The COVID19 pandemic gripped every nation’s healthcare system and provisions on all levels. In cardiac and aortic surgery, as it is with most specialities, elective surgeries were halted. Aims of the study: We captured reflections, contingencies, and current practices across of high-volume centres in cardiac and aortic surgery globally. We also aimed this study to assess decision on prioritization of the surgical patients, the need for personal protection equipment and choice of preoperative investigations in current dynamic and fluid climate. Methods: A validated web-based questionnaire was constructed and was circulated to the international surgeons amongst high volume cardiac and aortic surgery centres. Their intrinsic feedback on decision making, impact of the lockdown and perspectives for the future ahead us all were noted. Mixed method approach was constructed. Qualitative data analysis was introduced to signify the impact globally. Results: Overall, 23 centers from 18 countries participated in this international study. 91.7% of the respondents stopped operating on elective patients during the pandemic. Majority of the surgeons agreed that acute aortic dissection (87.1%) should be operated as emergency procedure and stable triple vessel disease (87.1%) to be considered as elective procedure. Three-fifth (60%) of the respondents relied on CT chest as a preoperative screening modality. Conclusion: In the present climate where there is paucity of evidence, this will give an interim consensus for the cardiac surgeons. With the increase in cumulative number of COVID19 patients, careful utilization of the resources regarding hospital beds and manpower is of paramount importance.