Replacing the ascending aorta in the elderly: do or do not
Advanced age is a proven independent factor for perioperative morbidity and mortality in all forms of aortic surgery and forms an important variable in most available risk scores. Improvements in selection and perioperative management of high-risk elderly cohorts have reduced the incidence of adverse outcomes. Concerns remain however in the surgical and anesthesiology community that exposing elderly frail patients to ascending aortic surgery is associated with significant risk. As with many clinical scenarios, individualization of care for each patient is of paramount importance. With advances in our understanding of perioperative and intraoperative care, age should no longer be considered in isolation as a contraindication to ascending aortic surgery.
KeywordsAorta Elderly Aneurysm
Compliance with ethical standards
No ethical approval required for this study.
No informed consent was needed for this review.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
- 4.Ortman JM, Velkoff VA, Hogan H. An Aging Nation: The Older Population in the United States; Current Population Reports. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau, Population Projections Branch; 2014.Google Scholar
- 10.Erbel R, Aboyans V, Boileau C, et al. 2014 ESC Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of aortic diseases: Document covering acute and chronic aortic diseases of the thoracic and abdominal aorta of the adult. The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Aortic Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2873–926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Biancari F, Vasques F, Benenati V, Juvonen T. Contemporary results after surgical repair of type A aortic dissection in patients aged 80 years and older: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011;40:1058–63.Google Scholar
- 23.Piccardo A, Regesta T, Pansini S, et al. Should octogenarians be denied access to surgery for acute type A aortic dissection? J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2009;50:205–12.Google Scholar