The article by Moll and colleagues [1] reports the results of a retrospective review of 715 patients undergoing arterial switch operation at their institution over a 26-year period. The main stated findings of the article were that:(1) complex coronary anomalies (CCAs) have an important influence on the reintervention rate and the postoperative coronary event rate among their patients; (2) a common variant, circumflex coronary artery (Cx) from the right coronary artery (1LAD2RCALCx), does not appear to have an effect on the clinical outcomes studied; and (3) complex cardiac anomalies, which were included in the population, were a risk factor for worse outcome.There are two integrated messages from their article, the first of which is unstated directly: that the trap-door technique could mitigate the effects of some of these anomalies. The second point, which the authors state only in the final sentence of both the abstract and the paper, is that patients with CCAs must be followed "closely" because the effects of coronary anomalies may increase over time. While I happen to agree with the authors' conclusions on both accounts, they are not directly supported by the data. The benefit of the trap-door technique (which, incidentally was documented only for reintervention and not for mitigation of postoperative coronary events [PCEs]) is likely confounded with an important era-effect, as the trap-door technique was adopted after 1996 and era was the variable that fell out as the important determinant of PCE. Although these relationships are complex, an analytic design that exposes the relative importance of each variable (ie, boot strapping) or even the construction of statistical models that quantify the attenuation of risk with the addition of one or the other variable, would have been more informative. Regarding the statement about the rigor of postoperative surveillance, the authors have not provided a control population in which their current algorithm was not followed. Moreover, it is unclear whether the authors are or have evaluated the efficacy and utility of the current surveillance algorithm. For example, were the PCEs among those patients in whom a deviation in surveillance occurred? Was the current protocol driven by empiric data from their experience? Fortunately, the group from Boston Children's Hospital has made exceptional strides in elucidating a protocol for postoperative arterial switch surveillance and iteratively revising it to optimize components with a strong influence on outcome. The provision of these data from the current cohort of 715 patients with enviable follow-up would have been compelling and useful to our specialty. Lastly, the statement that the influence of CCAs may increase over time is at odds with the data presented. In fact, the early intervention and mortality rates were higher than any late events, which ought to lead to an orthogonal conclusion: coronary issues that are clinically relevant manifest early in the course for these patients. As a result, concerted followup in the ...