Background: Left subclavian artery revascularization (LSA) is frequently performed in the setting of thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR). The purpose of this study was to compare different techniques for LSA revascularization during TEVAR. Methods: We performed a single center’s retrospective cohort study from 2016 to 2019. Patients were categorized by LSA revascularization methods, including direct coverage without revascularization (Unrevascularized), carotid-subclavian bypass (CSB), fenestrated TEVAR (F-TEVAR). Indications, demographics, operation details, and outcomes were analyzed using standard statistical analysis. Results: 171 patients underwent TEVAR with LSA coverage, 16.4% (n = 28) were unrevascularized and the remaining patients underwent CSB (n = 100 [58.5%]) or F-TEVAR (n = 43 [25.1%]). Demographics were similar between the unrevascularized and revascularized groups, except for procedure urgent status (p = 0.005). The incidence of postoperative spinal cord ischemia was significantly higher between unrevascularized and revascularized group (10.7% vs. 1.4%; p = 0.032). There was no difference in 30-day and mid-term rates of mortality, stroke, and left upper extremity ischemia. CSB was more likely time-consuming than F-TEVAR [3.25 (2.83–4) vs. 2 (1.67–2.67) hours, p = 0], but there were no statistically significant differences in 30-day or midterm outcomes for CSB versus F-TEVAR. During a mean follow-up time of 24.8 months, estimates survival rates had no difference. Conclusions: LSA revascularization in zone 2 TEVAR is necessary which is associated with a low 30-day rate of spinal cord ischemia. When LSA revascularization is required during TEVAR, CSB and F-TEVAR are all safe and effective methods, and F-TEVAR appears to offer equivalent clinical outcomes as a less time-consuming and minimally invasive alternative.

Background: Insulin resistance (IR) is a significant risk factor for cardiometabolic diseases and a defining feature of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study aimed to examine the potential value of triglyceride-glucose (TyG) index as a predictor of prognosis in coronary heart disease (CHD) patients with T2DM after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery and to facilitate the identification of those at high risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) for closer monitoring or possible early intervention.Methods: This study enrolled 386 T2DM patients who underwent CABG surgery at Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital. Patients were separated into two groups according to the median preoperative TyG Index. The Kaplan-Meier plot was used to compare the rate of MACEs-free survival in T2DM patients after CABG. The independent risk factors for the occurrence of MACEs were investigated using multivariate analysis. Nomogram was used to depict the predictive model.Results: Significantly more MACEs occurred in individuals with higher medians of the TyG index (65 (33.7%) vs. 39 (20.2%), p=0.003). TyG index [hazard ratio (HR) 12.926], LVEF [hazard ratio (HR) 0.916], and NYHA functional class III/IV [hazard ratio (HR) 4.331] were identified as independent predictors of MACEs incidence in post-CABG T2DM patients by multivariate analysis. The area under the curve (AUC) for predicting MACEs using the TyG index was 0.89 at five years. Combining the TyG index, LVEF, and NYHA functional class III/IV to build a novel risk assessment model for postoperative MACEs, the AUC climbed to 0.93 at five years. With AUCs, the nomogram comprised of the TyG index, LVEF, and NYHA functional class III/IV demonstrated strong specificity in the training and test sets.Conclusions: The incidence of MACEs is high among post-CABG T2DM patients with a high TyG index. TyG index improves the diagnostic accuracy of MACEs, especially at long-term follow-up. A high TyG index may serve as an early warning signal for individuals to undertake lifestyle adjustments that can reduce the progression or incidence of MACEs.

Background: Acute type A aortic dissection (aTAAD) is a lethal disease and age is an important risk factor for outcomes. This retrospective study was to analyze the impact of age stratification in aTAAD, and to provide clues for surgeons when they make choices of therapy strategies. Methods: From January 2011 to December 2019, 1092 aTAAD patients from Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital received surgical therapy. Patients were divided into 7 groups according to every ten-year interval (20–80 s). The differences between the groups were analyzed in terms of the baseline preoperative conditions, surgical methods and postoperative outcomes of patients of different age groups. During a median follow-up term of 17 months, the survival rates were compared among 7 groups through Kaplan–Meier analysis. Results: The median age was 52.0 years old in whole cohort. The multiple comorbidities were more common in old age groups (60 s, 70 s, 80 s), while the 20 s group patients had the highest proportion of Marfan syndrome (28.1%). Preoperative hypotension was highest in 80 s (16.7%, P = 0.038). Young age groups (20–60 s) had a higher rate of root replacement and total arch replacement, which led to a longer duration of operation and hypothermic circulation arrest. The overall mortality was 14.1%, the tendency of mortality was increased with age except 20 s group (33.3% in 80 s, P = 0.016). The postoperative morbidity of gastrointestinal bleeding and bowel ischemia were 16.7% and 11.1% in 80 s group. Conclusions: Age is a major impact factor for aTAAD surgery. Old patients presented more comorbidities before surgery, the mortality and complications rate were significantly higher even with less invasive and conservative surgical therapy. But the favorable long-term survival indicated that the simple or less extensive arch repair is the preferred surgery for patients over 70 years old.

The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes and follow-up results among 5 main aortic arch surgery methods for type A aortic dissection in a single centre. From 2002 to 2018, 958 type A aortic dissection patients who received surgical repair were divided into 5 groups according to the arch surgery method: hemiarch replacement (n = 206), island arch replacement (n = 54), total arch replacement with frozen elephant trunk (n = 425), triple-branched stent (n = 39) and fenestrated stent (n = 234). The indications for the different arch methods were related to the patient’s preoperative status, the location and extent of the dissection and the surgical ability of the surgeons. A comparative study was performed to identify the differences in the perioperative data, and the Kaplan–Meier analysis was used to assess the long-term survival and reintervention rates. Thirty matched surviving patients that were included in each group completed Computed tomography angiography to determine long-term reshaping effect. The 30-day mortality rate was 15.8%, and there was no difference among the 5 groups (P = 0.848). The follow-up survival rates were similar among the 5 groups (P = 0.130), and the same was true for patients without reintervention (P = 0.471). In the propensity matching study, patients with stents (frozen elephant trunk, triple-branched stent, fenestrated stent) had a slower aortic dilation rate and a higher ratio of thrombosis in the false lumen at the descending aortic and abdominal aortic levels than patients without stents. No standard method is available for arch surgery, and indications and long-term effects should be identified with clinical data. In our experiences, simpler surgical procedures could reduce mortality in critically ill patients and stents in the distal aorta could improve long-term reshape effects.

Background: Retrospective compared the results of root reconstruction and root replacement for acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) patients and observed the rate of aortic insufficiency (AI) and aortic root dilation in the midterm follow-up period. Methods: From 2008–2016, 427 ATAAD patients received surgical therapy in our center. There were 328 male and 99 female patients, aging from 22 to 83 years with a mean age of (51.1±12.5) years. These patients were divided into two major groups: 298 cases with root reinforcement reconstruction (Root Reconstruction), 129 cases with Bentall procedure (Root Replacement). Results: The 30-day mortality was 7.7% (33/427), while no difference between the 2 procedures (8.1% and 7.0%, P=0.844). Cross-clamp, cardiopulmonary bypass, and circulatory arrest times of all the patients were 252.5±78.1, 173.6±68.9, 30.7±9.5 minutes, respectively. In the average follow-up time of (34.5±26.1) months, midterm survival rates were similar between the 2 procedures (86.2% and 86.0%, P=0.957). Only one patient received redo Bentall procedure because of severe aortic regurgitation and dilated aortic root (50 mm) in the Root Reconstruction Group. Conclusions: The indication of root management of ATAAD is based on the diameter of aortic root, structure of aortic root, and the dissection involvement. For most ATAAD patients, aortic root reinforcement reconstruction is a feasible and safe method.