Background: Cannulation strategy in surgery for acute type A aortic dissection (ATAAD) remains controversial. We aimed to retrospectively analyze the safety and efficacy of double arterial cannulation (DAC) compared with right axillary cannulation (RAC) for ATAAD.

Methods: From January 2016 to December 2018, 431 ATAAD patients were enrolled in the study. Patients were divided into DAC group (n=341) and RAC group (n=90). Propensity score matching analysis was performed to compare the early and mid-term outcomes between these two groups. To confirm the organ protection effect by DAC, intraoperative blood gas results and cardiopulmonary bypass parameters were compared between the two groups.

Results: Demographics and preoperative comorbidities were comparable between two groups, while patients in DAC group were younger than RAC group (51.55±13.21 vs. 56.07±12.16 years, P＜0.001 ) . DAC had a higher incidence of limb malperfusion (18.2% vs. 10.0%, P=0.063) and lower incidence of coronary malperfusion (5.3% vs. 12.2%, P=0.019). No significant difference in cardiopulmonary bypass and cross-clamp time was found between the two groups. The in-hospital mortality was 13.5% (58/431), while there was no difference between the two groups (13.5% vs. 13.3%; P=0.969). Patients who underwent DAC had higher incidence of postoperative stroke (5.9% vs. 0%, P=0.019) and lower incidence of postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) (24.7% vs. 40.3%; P=0.015). During a mean follow-up period of 31.8 (interquartile range, 25-45) months, the overall survival was 81.5% for DAC group and 78.0% for RAC group (P=0.560). Intraoperative blood gas results and cardiopulmonary bypass parameters showed that DAC group had more intraoperative urine output volume than RAC group (P=0.05), and the time of cooling (P=0.04) and rewarming (P=0.04) were shorter in DAC group.

Conclusions: DAC will not increase the surgical risks compared to RAC, but could reduce the incidence of postoperative AKI which may be benefit for renal protection.