OBJECTIVES: The Ascyrus Medical Dissection Stent (AMDS) has been recently introduced as an alternative for total arch replacement in acute aortic dissection type A (AADA). The aim of this study was to evaluate the postoperative outcomes after AMDS treatment in a large contemporary cohort of AADA patients.METHODS: Data acquisition was performed retrospectively at 2 German aortic centres between 2020 and 2022 and comprised the perioperative parameters and postoperative results of all AADA patients. All patients treated with the AMDS for AADA were included in the study. The primary end point was in-hospital mortality. Secondary end points were defined as early postoperative and AMDS-related complications.RESULTS: Fifty-seven AADA patients treated by AMDS were included in the study group. The mean age was 64.6 ± 10.8 years and 59.7% (n = 34) were males. The actual in-hospital mortality was considerably lower than the predicted mortality risk by the German registry for acute aortic dissection type A score (16% vs 22%). The median ICU and in-hospital stay were 5 (interquartile range: 3–13) and 12 (interquartile range: 10–22) days, respectively. Postoperative complications comprised acute renal insufficiency (37%) with need for temporary (16%) or permanent dialysis (5%), delirium (26%), re-exploration for bleeding (14%), tracheostomy (14%) and new stroke (4%). A new AMDS-related complication (central stent collapse) was observed in 9% (n = 5) by postoperative computed tomography and chest X-ray. The incidence of complete central AMDS collapse did not impact 30-day mortality.CONCLUSIONS: The AMDS may be successfully used in AADA with acceptable 30-day mortality in accordance with the German registry for acute aortic dissection type A score. However, careful preoperative evaluation of the patient’s individual aortic anatomy regarding potential contraindications and proper device implantation are strongly recommended to avoid complete central AMDS collapse.

Background: Stanford A acute aortic dissection (AAD) is a life-threatening emergency associated with major morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of three different surgical approaches in patients with Stanford A AAD. Methods: From January 2006 to March 2015 a total of 240 consecutive patients with diagnosed Stanford A AAD underwent elective, isolated surgical aortic repair in our centre. Patients were divided into three groups according to the extent of surgical repair: isolated replacement of the ascending aorta, hemiarch replacement and total arch replacement. Patients were followed up for up to 9 years. After univariate analysis multinomial logistic regression was performed for subgroup analysis. Baseline characteristics and endpoints as well as long-term survival were analysed. Results: There were no statistically significant differences among the three groups in terms of demographics and preoperative baseline and clinical characteristics. Incidence of in-hospital stroke ( p = 0.034), need for reopening due to bleeding ( p = 0.031) and in-hospital mortality ( p = 0.017) increased significantly with the extent of the surgical approach. There was no statistical difference in terms of long-term survival ( p = 0.166) among the three groups. Applying multinomial logistic regression for subgroup analysis significantly higher odds for stroke ( p = 0.023), reopening for bleeding ( p = 0.010) and in-hospital mortality ( p = 0.009) for the arch surgery group in comparison to the ascending aorta surgery group as well as significantly higher odds for stroke ( p = 0.029) for the total arch surgery group in comparison to the hemiarch surgery group were identified. Conclusions: With Stanford A AAD the incidence of perioperative complications increased significantly with the extent of the surgical approach. Subgroup analysis and long-term follow up in patients undergoing isolated ascending or hemiarch surgery showed a lower incidence of cerebrovascular events compared with surgery for total arch replacement.

Background and Objectives: The incidence of distant metastases in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) is approximately 10%. Pulmonary metastases are the most frequent distant location, with an incidence of 70–85%. The standard treatment options are chemo-, immuno- and radiotherapy. Despite a benefit for long-term survival for patients with isolated pulmonary metastases, pulmonary metastasectomy (PM) is not the treatment of choice. Furthermore, many otorhinolaryngologists are not sufficiently familiar with the concept of PM. This work reviews the recent studies of pulmonary metastatic HNC and the results after pulmonary metastasectomy. Materials and Methods: PubMed, Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane library were checked for the case series’ of patients undergoing metastasectomy with pulmonary metastases published since 1 January 2000. Results: We included the data of 15 studies of patients undergoing PM. The 5-year survival rates varied from 21% to 59%, with median survival from 10 to 77 months after PM. We could not identify one specific prognostic factor for long-term survival after surgery. However, at least most studies stated that PM should be planned if a complete (R0) resection is possible. Conclusions: PM showed reliable results and is supposedly the treatment of choice for patients with isolated pulmonary metastases. Patients not suitable for surgery may benefit from other non-surgical therapy. Every HNC patient with pulmonary metastases should be discussed in the multidisciplinary tumor board to optimize the therapy and the outcome.

OBJECTIVES: Pulmonary metastasectomy (PM) is an established procedure for selected patients with metastatic head and neck cancer (HNC). Non-surgical therapy in the form of chemo- and immunotherapy and checkpoint inhibitors and radiation therapy are also treatment options. There are no randomized controlled trials comparing PM with non-surgical therapy. Here, we retrospectively compare the long-term survival of patients, undergoing PM with patients receiving non-surgical therapy. METHODS: All HNC patients with pulmonary metastases were included, if the primary HNC was treated curatively and distant metastases, apart from the lungs were excluded. The pulmonary metastases were confirmed by biopsy as metastases of the HNC primary tumour in the non-surgical therapy group. To further clarify that PM prolonged survival, a propensity score-matched analysis was performed. RESULTS: Between January 2010 and December 2020, 62 HNC patients with isolated pulmonary metastases were included in our analysis. Thirty-three underwent PM and 29 received non-surgical therapy. Histology, tumour stage and localization of the primary HNC did not differ between groups. The number of metastases, age and ASA classification did also not differ between the groups. Patients undergoing PM showed significantly better 1- (n = 31; 93.5% vs n = 19; 65.5%; P = 0.006), 3- (n = 17; 72.2% vs n = 9; 30.4%; P = 0.004) and 5-year (n = 10; 53.4% vs n = 4; 20.0%; P = 0.001) survival rates, compared to patients receiving non-surgical therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with pulmonary metastatic HNC undergoing PM had a significantly better overall survival compared to patients receiving non-surgical therapy. Therefore, selected patients should undergo PM to improve survival.

Objectives: About 90% of all non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cases are associated with inhalative tabacco smoking. Half of patients continue smoking during lung cancer therapy. We examined the effects of postoperative smoking cessation on lung function, quality of life (QOL) and long-term survival. Materials and Methods: In total, 641 patients, who underwent lobectomy between 2012 and 2019, were identified from our single institutional data base. Postoperatively, patients that actively smoked at the time of operation were offered a structured ‘smoking cessation’ program. For this retrospective analysis, two patient groups (total n = 90) were selected by pair matching. Group A (n = 60) had no postoperative tobacco smoking. Group B (n = 30) involved postoperative continued smoking. Lung function (FEV1, DLCO) and QOL (‘SF-36′ questionnaire) were measured 12 months postoperatively. We compared long-term outcomes using Kaplan–Meier curves. Results: The mean age in group A was 62.6 ± 12.5 years and that in group B was 64.3 ± 9.7 years (p = 0.82); 64% and 62%, respectively, were male (p = 0.46). Preoperative smoking habits were similar (‘pack years’: group A, 47 ± 31; group B, 49 ± 27; p = 0.87). All relevant baseline characteristics we collected were similar (p > 0.05). One year after lobectomy, FEV1 was reduced by 15% in both groups (p = 0.98). Smoking cessation was significantly associated with improved DLCO (group A: 11 ± 16%; group B: −5 ± 14%; p <0.001) and QOL (vitality (VT): +10 vs. −10, p = 0.017; physical role function (RP): +8 vs. −17, p = 0.012; general health perceptions (GH): +12 vs. −5, p = 0.024). Patients who stopped smoking postoperatively had a significantly superior overall survival (median survival: 89.8 ± 6.8 [95% CI: 76.6–103.1] months vs. 73.9 ± 3.6 [95% CI: 66.9–80.9] months, p = 0.034; 3-year OS rate: 96.2% vs. 81.0%, p = 0.02; 5-year OS rate: 80.0% vs. 64.0%, p = 0.016). The hazard ratio (HR) was 2.31 [95% CI: 1.04–5.13] for postoperative smoking versus tobacco cessation. Conclusion: Postoperative smoking cessation is associated with improved quality of life and lung function testing. Notably, a significant increase in long-term survival rates among non-smoking NSCLC patients was observed. These findings could serve as motivation for patients to successfully complete a non-smoking program.