Fig. 6: Schematic depiction of the study cohort.

This figure illustrates a multicenter, propensity-matched study comparing survival rates between valve-sparing aortic root replacement (VSRR) and aortic root replacement (ARR) for the treatment of type A aortic dissection (AAD). The study enrolled a total of 743 patients, with 499 in the VSRR group and 244 in the ARR group. Due to the lack of randomized controlled trials comparing these two surgical approaches, observational studies have been hindered by selection bias. To address this, the core methodology employed a propensity score-matched analysis (PSM), resulting in 249 patients in the VSRR group and 147 patients in the ARR group after matching. Sensitivity analysis was conducted using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to further validate the results. A, B highlight the key clinical implications of the study, which demonstrate that VSRR demonstrated improved long-term survival over ARR, albeit without significant differences in re-intervention rates. Our data advocate for a more extensive adoption of VSRR among suitable candidates, highlighting its potential benefits in the treatment of type A aortic dissection.