Hiroshi Kurazumi1, Akihito Mikamo2, Tomoaki Kudo1, Ryo Suzuki1, Masaya Takahashi1, Bungo Shirasawa1, Nobuya Zempo3, Kimikazu Hamano1. 1. Department of Surgery and Clinical Science, Yamaguchi University Graduate School of Medicine, Ube, Yamaguchi, Japan. 2. Department of Surgery and Clinical Science, Yamaguchi University Graduate School of Medicine, Ube, Yamaguchi, Japan mikamo@yamaguchi-u.ac.jp. 3. Division of Vascular Surgery, Yamaguchi Prefecture Grand Medical Center, Hofu, Yamaguchi, Japan.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Elderly patients are sometimes denied aortic arch surgery because of the perception of poor outcomes and an unacceptable quality of life (QOL). In this study, we evaluated the early clinical outcomes, long-term survival and QOL following surgical treatment for aortic arch disease in octogenarian patients. METHODS: A total of 47 consecutive patients over the age of 80 years were referred to our institutions. Of these patients, 20 underwent surgical intervention (surgical group) and 27 were treated medically (medical group). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed between the two groups, and the results were compared with age-matched population data. The risk factors for mortality were determined using a Cox regression analysis. A QOL assessment was performed using the 36-item Short Form Health Survey. RESULTS: The patient characteristics at baseline were not significantly different between the two groups. In the surgical cases, conventional total aortic arch replacement was performed in 15 patients, debranched thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in 2 and chimney TEVAR in 3. Emergency procedures were performed in 3 patients. No hospital deaths occurred in the surgical groups. Reoperation for bleeding was required in 2 patients, and prolonged mechanical ventilation was required in 4 patients. The 5-year survival was 61.5% in the surgical group and 14.2% in the medical group (P = 0.02). Freedom from aorta-related death at 5 years was 92.3% in the surgical group and 32.3% in the medical group (P = 0.01). There were no differences in the 5-year survival between patients undergoing surgical intervention and the sex- and age-matched population (P = 0.80), whereas the 5-year survival was significantly lower in patients who received medical therapy relative to the sex- and age-matched population (P < 0.001). Medical therapy was the sole risk factor for mortality (hazard ratio: 3.16, P = 0.04). Among the survivors at mid-term, the quality-of-life measures were similar between those in the surgical group and those in the medical group. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical intervention for aortic arch disease in octogenarians can yield satisfactory early clinical outcomes and acceptable mid-term survival with adequate daily activity. This study indicates that among octogenarians, age alone should not disqualify a patient from receiving an aortic arch intervention.
OBJECTIVES: Elderly patients are sometimes denied aortic arch surgery because of the perception of poor outcomes and an unacceptable quality of life (QOL). In this study, we evaluated the early clinical outcomes, long-term survival and QOL following surgical treatment for aortic arch disease in octogenarian patients. METHODS: A total of 47 consecutive patients over the age of 80 years were referred to our institutions. Of these patients, 20 underwent surgical intervention (surgical group) and 27 were treated medically (medical group). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed between the two groups, and the results were compared with age-matched population data. The risk factors for mortality were determined using a Cox regression analysis. A QOL assessment was performed using the 36-item Short Form Health Survey. RESULTS: The patient characteristics at baseline were not significantly different between the two groups. In the surgical cases, conventional total aortic arch replacement was performed in 15 patients, debranched thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in 2 and chimney TEVAR in 3. Emergency procedures were performed in 3 patients. No hospital deaths occurred in the surgical groups. Reoperation for bleeding was required in 2 patients, and prolonged mechanical ventilation was required in 4 patients. The 5-year survival was 61.5% in the surgical group and 14.2% in the medical group (P = 0.02). Freedom from aorta-related death at 5 years was 92.3% in the surgical group and 32.3% in the medical group (P = 0.01). There were no differences in the 5-year survival between patients undergoing surgical intervention and the sex- and age-matched population (P = 0.80), whereas the 5-year survival was significantly lower in patients who received medical therapy relative to the sex- and age-matched population (P < 0.001). Medical therapy was the sole risk factor for mortality (hazard ratio: 3.16, P = 0.04). Among the survivors at mid-term, the quality-of-life measures were similar between those in the surgical group and those in the medical group. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical intervention for aortic arch disease in octogenarians can yield satisfactory early clinical outcomes and acceptable mid-term survival with adequate daily activity. This study indicates that among octogenarians, age alone should not disqualify a patient from receiving an aortic arch intervention.