Skip to main content
Log in

Impact of frailty on early and mid-term outcomes of hybrid aortic arch repair

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Surgery Today Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of frailty on the clinical outcomes of hybrid aortic arch repair with debranching of the supra-aortic arteries.

Methods

Consecutive patients ≥ 75 years old who underwent hybrid aortic arch repair from January 2010 to December 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Using the Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA) scale, all patients with a CSHA scale score > 4 were defined as frail. The frail patients (FP) group and the non-frail patients (NFP) group were compared regarding the early and mid-term outcomes of hybrid aortic arch repair.

Results

A total of 84 patients were included. The early postoperative results were not markedly different between the groups, except that the rate of transfer to a rehabilitation hospital was higher in the FP group than in the NFP group. The survival at 5 years was significantly lower in the FP group at 43.0% than in the NFP group at 67.7% (P = 0.015). However, the freedom from aorta-related death was not significantly different between the two groups.

Conclusion

Frailty did not affect the short-term outcomes of hybrid aortic arch repair; however, the mid-term outcomes, including the survival, of the frail patients were significantly worse than those of the non-frail patients, mostly because of non-aorta-related causes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. De Rango P, Cao P, Ferrer C, Simonte G, Coscarella C, Cieri E, et al. Aortic arch debranching and thoracic endovascular repair. J Vasc Surg. 2014;59(1):107–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Okada K, Omura A, Kano H, Sakamoto T, Tanaka A, Inoue T, et al. Recent advancements of total aortic arch replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012;144(1):139–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Benrashid E, Wang H, Keenan JE, Andersen ND, Meza JM, McCann RL, et al. Evolving practice pattern changes and outcomes in the era of hybrid aortic arch repair. J Vasc Surg. 2016;63(2):323–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hiraoka A, Chikazawa G, Totsugawa T, Tamura K, Ishida A, Sakaguchi T, et al. Objective analysis of midterm outcomes of conventional and hybrid aortic arch repair by propensity-score matching. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017;154(1):100-106.e1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Vallejo N, Rodriguez-Lopez JA, Heidari P, Wheatley G, Caparrelli D, Ramaiah V, et al. Hybrid repair of thoracic aortic lesions for zone 0 and 1 in high-risk patients. J Vasc Surg. 2012;55(2):318–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Settepani F, Cappai A, Basciu A, Barbone A, Tarelli G. Outcome of open total arch replacement in the modern era. J Vasc Surg. 2016;63(2):537–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Soares TR, Melo R, Amorim P, Ministro A, Sobrinho G, Silvestre L, et al. Clinical outcomes of aortic arch hybrid repair in a real-world single-center experience. J Vasc Surg. 2020;72(3):813–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Mitchell RS, Ishimaru S, Ehrlich MP, Iwase T, Lauterjung L, Shimono T, et al. First international summit on thoracic aortic endografting: roundtable on thoracic aortic dissection as an indication for endografting. J Endovasc Ther. 2002;9(Suppl 2):II98-105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Rockwood K, Song X, MacKnight C, Bergman H, Hogan DB, McDowell I, et al. A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people. CMAJ. 2005;173(5):489–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chikwe J, Adams DH. Frailty: the missing element in predicting operative mortality. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2010;22(2):109–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kim DH, Kim CA, Placide S, Lipsitz LA, Marcantonio ER. Preoperative frailty assessment and outcomes at 6 months or later in older adults undergoing cardiac surgical procedures: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2016;165(9):650–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Shimura T, Yamamoto M, Kano S, Kagase A, Kodama A, Koyama Y, et al. Impact of the clinical frailty scale on outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Circulation. 2017;135(21):2013–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Afilalo J, Lauck S, Kim DH, Lefèvre T, Piazza N, Lachapelle K, et al. Frailty in older adults undergoing aortic valve replacement: the FRAILTY-AVR study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70(6):689–700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Forcillo J, Condado JF, Ko YA, Yuan M, Binongo JN, Ndubisi NM, et al. Assessment of commonly used frailty markers for high- and extreme-risk patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg. 2017;104(6):1939–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Sepehri A, Beggs T, Hassan A, Rigatto C, Shaw-Daigle C, Tangri N, et al. The impact of frailty on outcomes after cardiac surgery: a systematic review. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;148(6):3110–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Yanagawa B, Graham MM, Afilalo J, Hassan A, Arora RC. Frailty as a risk predictor in cardiac surgery: beyond the eyeball test. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2018;156(1):172-176:e172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ganapathi AM, Englum BR, Hanna JM, Schechter MA, Gaca JG, Hurwitz LM, et al. Frailty and risk in proximal aortic surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;147(1):186-191.e1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Shiraya S, Nakamura Y, Harada S, Kishimoto Y, Onohara T, Otsuki Y, et al. Debranching thoracic endovascular aortic repair for distal aortic arch aneurysm in elderly patients aged over 75 years old. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2020;15(1):13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Miyata H, Hashimoto H, Horiguchi H, Matsuda S, Motomura N, Takamoto S. Performance of in-hospital mortality prediction models for acute hospitalization: hospital standardized mortality ratio in Japan. BMC Health Serv Res. 2008;8:229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ikeno Y, Yokawa K, Yamanaka K, Inoue T, Tanaka H, Okada K, et al. Total arch replacement in octogenarians and nonagenarians: a single-center 18-year experience. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020;160(2):346-356.e1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Okita Y, Okada K, Omura A, Kano H, Minami H, Inoue T, et al. Total arch replacement using antegrade cerebral perfusion. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013;145(3Suppl):S63-71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Lee DH, Buth KJ, Martin BJ, Yip AM, Hirsch GM. Frail patients are at increased risk for mortality and prolonged institutional care after cardiac surgery. Circulation. 2010;121(8):973–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hiraoka A, Saito K, Chikazawa G, Totsugawa T, Tamura K, Ishida A, et al. Modified predictive score based on frailty for mid-term outcomes in open total aortic arch surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2018;54(1):42–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Elefteriades JA. Indications for aortic replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2010;140(6Suppl):S5-9 (discussion S45–51).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported, in part, by JSPS KAKENHI Grant number 16K10659

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yasushi Yoshikawa.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kishimoto, Y., Yoshikawa, Y., Morimoto, K. et al. Impact of frailty on early and mid-term outcomes of hybrid aortic arch repair. Surg Today 52, 1194–1201 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-021-02443-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-021-02443-x

Keywords

Navigation