At the conclusion of a primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and after the cardiologist makes certain that there is no residual stenosis following stenting, assessment of coronary flow becomes the top priority. The presence of no-reflow is a serious prognostic sign. No-reflow can result in poor healing of the infarct and adverse left ventricular remodeling, increasing the risk for major adverse cardiac events, including congestive heart failure and death. To achieve normal flow, features associated with a high incidence of no-reflow must be anticipated, and measures must be undertaken to prevent its occurrence. In this review, the authors discuss various preventive strategies for no-reflow as well as pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions that improve coronary blood flow, such as intracoronary adenosine and nitroprusside. Nonpharmacological therapies, such as induced hypothermia, were successful in animal studies, but their effectiveness in reducing no-reflow in humans remains to be determined.

Objective Hybrid repair of the transverse aortic arch may allow for aortic arch repair with reduced morbidity in patients who are suboptimal candidates for conventional open surgery. Here, we present our results with an algorithmic approach to hybrid arch repair, based upon the extent of aortic disease and patient comorbidities. Methods Between August 2005 and January 2012, 87 patients underwent hybrid arch repair by three principal procedures: zone 1 endograft coverage with extra-anatomic left carotid revascularization (zone 1, n=19), zone 0 endograft coverage with aortic arch debranching (zone 0, n=48), or total arch replacement with staged stented elephant trunk completion (stented elephant trunk, n=20). Results The mean patient age was 64 years and the mean expected in-hospital mortality rate was 16.3% as calculated by the EuroSCORE II. 22% (n=19) of operations were non-elective. Sternotomy, cardiopulmonary bypass, and deep hypothermic circulatory arrest were required in 78% (n=68), 45% (n=39), and 31% (n=27) of patients, respectively, to allow for total arch replacement, arch debranching, or other concomitant cardiac procedures, including ascending ± hemi-arch replacement in 17% (n=8) of patients undergoing zone 0 repair. All stented elephant trunk procedures (n=20) and 19% (n=9) of zone 0 procedures were staged, with 41% (n=12) of patients undergoing staged repair during a single hospitalization. The 30-day/in-hospital rates of stroke and permanent paraplegia/paraparesis were 4.6% (n=4) and 1.2% (n=1), respectively. Three of 27 (11.1%) patients with native ascending aorta zone 0 proximal landing zone experienced retrograde type A dissection following endograft placement. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 5.7% (n=5), however, 30-day/in-hospital mortality increased to 14.9% (n=13) due to eight 30-day out-of-hospital deaths. Native ascending aorta zone 0 endograft placement was found to be the only univariate predictor of 30-day/in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 4.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.35-15.89; P=0.02). Over a mean follow-up of 28.5 ± 22.2 months, 13% (n=11) of patients required reintervention for type 1A (n=4), type 2 (n=6), or type 3 (n=1) endoleak. Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival at 1, 3, and 5 years were 73%, 60%, and 51%, respectivel. Conclusions Hybrid aortic arch repair can be tailored to patient anatomy and comorbid status to allow complete repair of aortic pathology, frequently in a single stage, with acceptable outcomes. However, endograft placement in the native ascending aorta is associated with high rates of retrograde type A dissection and 30-day/in-hospital mortality and should be approached with caution.

Objectives The purpose of this study was to compare the results of acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) repair before and after implementation of a multidisciplinary thoracic aortic surgery program (TASP) at our institution, with dedicated high-volume thoracic aortic surgeons, a multidisciplinary approach to thoracic aortic disease management, and a standardized protocol for ATAAD repair. Background Outcomes of ATAAD repair may be improved when operations are performed at specialized high-volume thoracic aortic surgical centers. Methods Between 1999 and 2011, 128 patients underwent ATAAD repair at our institution. Records of patients who underwent ATAAD repair 6 years before (n = 56) and 6 years after (n = 72) implementation of the TASP were retrospectively compared. Expected operative mortality rates were calculated using the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection pre-operative prediction model. Results Baseline risk profiles and expected operative mortality rates were comparable between patients who underwent surgery before and after implementation of the TASP. Operative mortality before TASP implementation was 33.9% and was statistically equivalent to the expected operative mortality rate of 26.0% (observed-to-expected mortality ratio 1.30; p = 0.54). Operative mortality after TASP implementation fell to 2.8% and was statistically improved compared with the expected operative mortality rate of 18.2% (observed-to-expected mortality ratio 0.15; p = 0.005). Differences in survival persisted over long-term follow-up, with 5-year survival rates of 85% observed for TASP patients compared with 55% for pre-TASP patients (p = 0.002). Conclusions ATAAD repair can be performed with results approximating those of elective proximal aortic surgery when operations are performed by a high-volume multidisciplinary thoracic aortic surgery team. Efforts to standardize or centralize care of patients undergoing ATAAD are warranted.

No abstract

This study confirms the excellent short-term outcomes of TEVAR for acute complicated type B dissection and demonstrates the results to be durable and sustained over long-term follow-up. Although aortic reinterventions were required in one-quarter of patients, no aortic-related deaths were observed. These data support the use of TEVAR for acute complicated type B aortic dissection but also highlight the importance of life-long aortic surveillance by an experienced aortic referral center in order to identify and treat complications of the underlying disease process and treatment, as well as new aortic pathologies, as they arise.