AVNeo is suitable for patients with AS considering its early and mid-term outcomes. Verification of long-term outcomes and reliability is necessary.

The movement of the aortic annulus after AVNeo is comparable with that of the aortic annulus of a normal aortic valve. Thus, AVNeo can be regarded as a more physiological operation in that it maintains the characteristics of the aortic valve similar to those of a normal aortic valve.

Background Lead perforation is one of the major complications of pacemaker implantation, but cases of right ventricular (RV) lead perforation through the septum and left ventricle are rarely reported. We described a rare case of left ventricular (LV) free wall perforation by an RV lead and the management of this complication. Case summary An 84-year-old man was admitted with a dual-chamber pacemaker due to pacing failure caused by an RV lead fracture. New lead implantation was performed on the next day, but pacing failure occurred again on the second post-operative day (POD). We found the lead perforation on the fluoroscopy during temporary pacemaker insertion. Computed tomography scan and transthoracic echocardiogram showed that the added lead perforated through both the septum and LV free wall. A new lead was inserted on the fourth POD, and an off-pump open chest surgery for extraction of the penetrating lead was performed uneventfully on the 20th POD. Discussion We considered that some features of the lead (SelectSecure 3830-69, Medtronic) may be related to this complication, as the lead was very thin, had a non-retractable bare screw and was inserted with a dedicated delivery catheter. We have to be careful when performing implantation of this kind of lead to avoid such a rare complication.

No abstract

OBJECTIVES We investigated the outcomes of total arch replacement with frozen elephant trunk (FET) for Stanford type A acute aortic dissection and the patterns of postoperative aortic remodelling from computed tomographic (CT) findings. METHODS From April 2015 to November 2018, we performed total arch replacement with FET for Stanford type A aortic dissection in 30 patients. Postoperative contrast-enhanced CT showed the position of the FET distal end, the number and the site of communications between the lumina and the presence or absence of aortic remodelling. RESULTS Primary entry tear was found in the ascending aorta (n = 6), proximal arch (n = 6), aortic arch (n = 11) and distal arch (n = 7). The mean diameter and length of FET were 26 ± 2 and 84 ± 18 mm, respectively. Postoperative contrast-enhanced CT was performed in 26 patients. When the number of communications between the lumina was 0, complete aortic remodelling was achieved in all cases (n = 12). In the case of the most proximal tear in the descending aorta (n = 9), aortic remodelling was not recognized in 3 cases, and additional TEVAR was performed because of diameter enlargement. In the remaining 6 patients, neither aortic remodelling nor aortic diameter enlargement was recognized. When the most proximal tear was below the diaphragm (n = 5), aortic remodelling occurred up to the most proximal tear, but not in the periphery. CONCLUSIONS We investigated the patterns of aortic remodelling after total arch replacement with FET for Stanford type A aortic dissection from postoperative CT findings. Regardless of the position of the most proximal tear in the descending aorta, aortic remodelling did not occur as long as the most proximal tear was located in the descending aorta. When the most proximal tear occurred in the descending aorta, TEVAR as a pre-emptive treatment can be effective in preventing postoperative aortic adverse events.