In low flow states, underestimation errors occur when the Gorlin formula is used to calculate valve area. A model of valvular stenosis designed to examine changes in the hydraulic discharge coefficient (Cd) and coefficient of orifice contraction (Cc) may explain these errors. Unsteady flow was examined in a pulsatile pump model and in a dog model. Valve areas were calculated from pressure and flow data using: a modified form of the Gorlin formula (assuming constant values for Cd and Cc) and a corrected formula (with values of Cd and Cc obtained from steady state data). Valve area was also calculated using the continuity equation with velocity and flow data (constant Cc). Flow velocities were measured using a newly designed ultrasound Doppler catheter capable of resolving flow velocities of up to 5.5 m/s. Both the corrected formula and continuity equation were highly predictive of actual valve area (r = 0.99, slope or M = 0.96 and r = 0.99, M = 1.06, respectively). The modified Gorlin equation was less accurate and tended to underestimate valve areas (r = 0.87, M = 0.83). This underestimation was most notable at low rates of flow (Gorlin: r = 0.94, M = 0.53; continuity: r = 0.93, M = 0.81 and r = 0.94, M = 0.89, respectively) more accurately than the modified Gorlin formula (r = 0.69, M = 0.49). In patients with low cardiac output, hemodynamic formulas, such as the Gorlin formula, which assume a constant value for the hydraulic discharge coefficient (Cd), may be less accurate than formulas using either a corrected value of Cd or Doppler-determined flow velocity and mean systolic flow.

Acute type A aortic dissection (AcA-AoD) is a surgical emergency associated with very high morbidity and mortality. Unfortunately, the early outcome of emergency surgical repair has not improved substantially over the last 20 years. Many of the same debates occur repeatedly regarding operative extent and optimal conduct of the operation. The question remains: are patients suffering from too large an operation or too small?The pendulum favoring routine aortic valve resuspension, when feasible, has swung towards frequent aortic root replacement. This already aggressive approach is now being challenged with the even more extensive valve-sparing aortic root replacement (V-SARR) in selected patients. Distally, open replacement of most of the transverse arch is best in most patients. The need for late aortic re-intervention has not been shown to be affected by more extensive distal operative procedures, but the contemporary enthusiasm for a distal frozen elephant trunk (FET) only seems to build. It must be remembered that the first and foremost goal of the operation is to have an operative survivor; additional measures to reduce late morbidity are secondary aspirations. With increasing experience, true contraindications to emergency surgical operation have dwindled, but patients with advanced age, multiple comorbidities, and major neurological deficits do not fare well. The endovascular revolution, moreover, has spawned innovative options for modern practice, including ascending stent graft and adaptations of the old flap fenestration technique. Despite the increasingly complex operations and ever expanding therapies, this life-threatening disease remains a stubborn challenge for all cardiovascular surgeons. Development of specialized thoracic aortic teams and regionalization of care for patients with AcA-AoD offers the most promise to improve overall results.

No abstract

No abstract