Background Porcine aortic roots (PAR) have been reported in the literature with acceptable short and long-term outcomes for the treatment of aortic root aneurysms. However, their efficacy in type A aortic dissection (TAAD) is yet to be defined. Methods Using data from a locally collated aortic dissection registry, we compared the outcomes in patients undergoing aortic root replacement for TAAD using either of two surgical options: i) PAR or ii) composite valve grafts (CVG). A retrospective analysis was conducted for all procedures in the period 2005-2018. Results A total of 252 patients underwent procedures for TAAD in the time period. Sixty-five patients had aortic root replacements (PAR n=30, CVG n=35). Between group comparisons identified a younger CVG group (50.5 vs 64.5, p<0.05) although all other covariates were comparable. Operative parameters were comparable between the two groups. The use of PAR did not significantly impact operative mortality (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.22-3.61, p=0.992), stroke (OR 2.91, 0.25 – 34.09, p=0.395), re-operation (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.22 – 3.62, p=0.882) or length of stay (coef 2.33, -8.23 – 12.90, p=0.659) compared to CVG. Five-year survival was similar between both groups (PAR 59% vs CVG 69%, p=0.153) and re-operation was negligible. Echocardiography revealed significantly lower aortic valve gradients in the PAR group (8.69 vs 15.45 mmHg, p<0.0001), and smaller left ventricular dimensions both at 6 weeks and 1 year follow up (p<0.05). Conclusions This study highlights the comparable short and mid-term outcomes of PAR in cases of TAAD, in comparison to established therapy.