We compared outcomes of single-stage hybrid aortic arch replacement (frozen elephant trunk) versus 2-stage hybrid repairs with primary open arch procedures followed by thoracic endovascular stenting.

Methods
This study reports a single-center retrospective review (2003 to 2016) of 118 patients undergoing hybrid repair of the aortic arch including 48 single-stage repairs versus 70 two-stage repairs.

Results
Single-stage repair was performed in 48 patients, including 31 (64.6%) men and 17 (35.4%) women with a mean age of 64 ± 11 years and a 2-stage procedure was performed in 70 patients, including 42 (60%) men and 28 (40%) women with a mean age of 65.67 ± 13.3 years (p = 0.46). More emergent single-stage procedures were performed in 23 of 48 (47.9%) patients versus 2-stage procedures in 8 of 70 (11.43%) patients (p < 0.001). Between the single- and 2-stage groups, there was no difference in stroke (6.25% [3 of 48] versus 14.28% [10 of 70]; p = 0.23), spinal cord ischemia (4.16% [2 of 48] versus 5.7% [4 of 70]; p = 1.0), or 30-day mortality rate: 8 of 48 (16.7%) patients versus a combined 30-day mortality rate of the 2-stage procedure of 14.8% (4 of 70 [5.7%] at the first stage and 5 of 55 [9.1%] at the second stage; p = 0.56), respectively. After exclusion of the 30-day mortality, midterm survival was 86% at 1 to 2 years for single-stage patients versus 80% at 1 year and 46% at 2 years for the 2-stage patients (p = 0.0019).

Conclusions
Both single-stage and 2-stage hybrid arch replacements are effective approaches for treating complex aortic arch diseases. Early deaths and neurological outcomes in the single-stage group are comparable to those in the combined 2-stage group. Furthermore, in this series, patients who had a single-stage hybrid procedure had a higher survival rate at 2 years.