Surgical Repair of Distal Aortic Arch Aneurysm With Distal Extension: Sternotomy Versus Thoracotomy

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus as to whether a median approach or a lateral approach is better for distal aortic arch aneurysms with distal extensions. The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of these two approaches for distal aortic arch aneurysms with distal extensions.

METHODS: From January 2001 to December 2017, 212 consecutive patients with distal aortic arch aneurysms with distal extensions underwent surgery using different approaches: hemiarch and descending thoracic aneurysm replacement through thoracotomy (group 1, n = 91); and total arch and descending thoracic aneurysm replacement through sternotomy (group 2, n = 121). Early and late outcomes were compared using scores and inverse probability of treatment adjustments to reduce treatment selection bias.

RESULTS: The in-hospital mortality was 9.89% (9 of 91) in the thoracotomy group and 2.48% (3 of 121) in the sternotomy group (p = 0.02). The sternotomy group had a lower incidence of permanent stroke (2.48%, 3 of 121) compared with the thoracotomy group (10.99%, 10 of 91, p = 0.01). After adjustment, patients who underwent thoracotomy were at a greater risk of hospital mortality (odds ratio 5.0, p = 0.01), permanent stroke (odds ratio 6.83, p < 0.01), and pneumonia (odds ratio 2.99, p = 0.04), compared with patients who underwent sternotomy. The overall survival at 10 years was 69.8% ± 7.0% for the thoracotomy group and 83.0% ± 5.0% for the sternotomy group (unadjusted p = 0.049, adjusted p = 0.034).

CONCLUSIONS: The sternotomy approach showed better outcomes in terms of operative mortality, stroke, and pneumonia, as well as long-term survival compared with the thoracotomy approach. These results suggested that the sternotomy approach was more appropriate for patients with distal aortic arch aneurysms with distal extensions.