Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the short- and long-term outcomes of unilateral and bilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion (uni-ACP and bi-ACP) in acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) repair. METHODS: From 2001 to 2017, 307 patients underwent surgical repair of an ATAAD using uni-ACP (n = 140) and bi-ACP (n = 167). Data were collected through the Department of Cardiac Surgery Data Warehouse, medical record review, and the National Death Index database. RESULTS: The demographics and preoperative comorbidities were similar between the uni-ACP and bi-ACP groups. Both groups had similar rates of procedures for aortic valve/root, ascending aorta, frozen elephant trunk, and other concomitant procedures. Perioperative outcomes were not significantly different between the 2 groups (30-day mortality: uni-ACP 3.4% vs bi-ACP 7.8%, P = .12) except reoperation for bleeding was significantly lower in uni-ACP (5% vs 12%, P = .03). Between the uni-ACP and bi-ACP groups, overall postoperative stroke rate (6% vs 9%, P = .4) and left brain stroke rate (0.7% vs 3.0%, P = .23) were not significantly different. The odds ratio of uni-ACP versus bi-ACP was 0.87 (P = .80) for postoperative stroke and 0.86 (P = .81) for operative mortality. The mid-term survival was better in the uni-ACP group, P = .027 (5-year: 84% vs 76%). The hazard ratio of all-time mortality for uni-ACP versus bi-ACP was 0.74 (95% confidence interval, 0.33-1.65), P = .46. CONCLUSIONS: In ATAAD, both uni-ACP and bi-ACP are equally effective to protect the brain with low postoperative stroke rates and mortality in hemiarch to zone 3 arch replacement. Uni-ACP is recommended for its simplicity and less manipulation of arch branch vessels.