Ochal, Domenic

Purpose: Despite the 2022 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines recommending cardiac rehabilitation (CR) after aortic dissection repair, both patient participation in CR and the associated clinical outcomes remain poorly understood. Methods: Adults (≥18 years of age) discharged alive following thoracic aortic dissection surgery across the Mayo Clinic Enterprise (January 2012 to November 2022), with follow-up until May 2024, were included (IRB #24-001141). Data were presented using summary statistics and logistic regression modeling. Results: A total of 186 patients were referred; 37% were female, and the median age was 64 (51, 73) years. Dissections were classified as type A (43%), type B (18%), or a combination, and 55% had residual dissection. Over half (53%) did not start CR, with older age (aOR = 0.97: 95% CI, 0.94 - 0.99; P = .003), family history of aortic dissections and/or aneurysms (aOR = 0.17: 95% CI, 0.04 - 0.54; P = .005), and tobacco use (aOR = 0.35: 95% CI, 0.13 - 0.91; P = .037) being associated with lower odds of enrollment. Of the 87 who enrolled, 34 did so at a Mayo Clinic facility. There were no complications, with no difference in adverse outcomes. Among those with evaluations at graduation from CR (n = 21), quality of life (Dartmouth index 16 [14, 19] vs 25 [22, 30]; P = .002) and 6-minute walk distance (488 [375, 531] vs 302 [235, 398] m; P = .001) improved. Conclusions: Following thoracic aortic dissection repair, CR significantly improved quality of life and functional capacity without adverse events. Further work is needed to improve enrollment and establish data-driven safety margins for exercise.

Background: Despite expert opinion recommending patient-tailored cardiac rehabilitation (CR) after acute aortic dissection, both patient participation in CR and the associated risk factor modification after CR following aortic dissection repair are poorly understood. Objectives: To describe the characteristics of patients referred to CR, as well as the enrollment rate and outcomes of those referred to CR following thoracic aortic dissection. Methods: We reviewed electronic health records of adults (≥18) discharged alive following thoracic aortic dissection surgery across the Mayo Clinic Enterprise (01/01/2020-11/15/2022) with follow-up to 05/15/2024 (IRB #24-001141). Data are presented using summary statistics. Results: During the study period, 85 patients were included (median [IQR] age: 65 [50-75] years; 40% female; Table 1 ). Across 84% (N=71) who were referred to CR at discharge, 55% (N=39) enrolled. In those patients referred versus not referred to CR, the prevalence of type A dissection (75% vs. 43%), end-organ involvement (27% vs. 0%), and underlying CAD (54% vs. 21%) were greater while current tobacco use (9% vs. 29%) was lower. Of those enrolled at Mayo Clinic (N=16), CR was started 35 (28-65) days following surgery. These patients completed 21 (13-30) CR sessions at an exercise intensity of 59% (50-65%) maximum predicted heart rate. CR was discontinued in 44% (N=7) due to non-cardiac reasons ( Table 2 ). Of the 9 patients who completed CR, general health status (Dartmouth index: 19 [17-21] vs. 26 [22-34]), depressive symptoms (PHQ-9: 1 [0-1] vs. 4 [1-4]), and exercise capacity (6MWT: 214 [196-244] vs. 384 [305-597] meters) improved ( Table 2 ). There were no reported complications or deaths, with stable aortic sizes reported at 18 months. Conclusions: CR improves functional capacity and well-being without complications in patients after thoracic aortic dissection surgery. Further investigation is needed to better assess CR efficacy and usage in this population.