Current outcomes of simultaneous carotid endarterectomy and coronary artery bypass graft surgery in North America

Investigation of Combined Carotid Endarterectomy and Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Outcomes and Adverse Event Risk Factors in the Vascular Quality Initiative

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to investigate outcomes of simultaneous CEA and CABG utilizing the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI). Additionally, we seek to investigate risks for both perioperative and long-term mortality and adverse neurological outcomes.

METHODS

All carotid endarterectomies in the VQI between January 2003 and May 2022 were queried. We identified 171,816 CEA in the database. We extracted 2 cohorts from these CEA. The first group was patients who underwent simultaneous carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and coronary artery bypass (CABG) (N = 3137). The second group encompassed patients who underwent CABG or percutaneous coronary artery angioplasty/stent within 5 years of ultimately undergoing CEA (N = 27,387). We investigated the following outcomes in a multivariable fashion: 1. Risks for mortality in long term follow-up for both cohorts combined; 2. Risks for ischemic event in the cerebral hemisphere ipsilateral to the CEA site after index hospital admission in follow up for both cohorts combined. Tertiary outcomes are also investigated in the manuscript.

RESULTS

On multivariable analysis, patients undergoing simultaneous combined CEA and CABG had equivalent long-term survival to patients who underwent coronary revascularization within 5 years of ultimately undergoing CEA. Five-year survival is noted to be 84.5% vs 86% with a Cox regression non-significant P-value (.203). Significant multivariable risks for reduced long term survival (P < .03 for all) included: advancing age (HR 2.48/year); smoking history (HR 1.26); Diabetes (HR 1.33); history of CHF (HR 1.66); history of COPD (HR 1.54); baseline renal insufficiency at the time of surgery (HR 1.30); anemia (HR1.64); lack of preoperative aspirin (HR 1.12); and lack of preoperative statin (HR 1.32); lack of patch placement at CEA site (HR 1.16); perioperative MI (HR 2.04); perioperative CHF (1.66); perioperative dysrhythmia (HR 1.36); cerebral reperfusion injury (HR 2.23); perioperative ischemic neurological event (HR 2.48); and lack of statin at discharge (HR 2.04). Amongst patients with documented neurological status in follow up, combined CEA and CABG had over 99% freedom from ischemic cerebral event ipsilateral to the CEA site after discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined CEA and CABG provides excellent long-term mortality prevention in patients with co-existing severe coronary and carotid atherosclerosis. Simultaneous CEA and CABG provides equivalent stroke prevention and long-term survival to both a cohort of patients undergoing coronary revascularization within 5 years of CEA and patients undergoing isolated CEA or CABG in the literature. The two most impactful modifiable risk factors towards long-term stroke and mortality prevention for patients undergoing simultaneous CEA-CABG are patch placement at CEA site and adherence to statin medication therapy.

Midterm outcomes of simultaneous carotid revascularization combined with coronary artery bypass grafting

BACKGROUND

Simultaneous carotid endarterectomy (CEA) combined with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been widely used in patients with coronary heart disease complicated with severe carotid stenosis to reduce the risk of stroke and death. Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has been proven to be an alternative to CEA in recent years. We investigated the early and mid-term outcomes of simultaneous CEA or CAS combined with CABG in these patients.

METHODS

From January 2011 to January 2021, 88 patients who underwent simultaneous carotid revascularization combined with CABG under the same anesthesia in Beijing Anzhen Hospital were retrospectively analyzed, and this study included 25 patients who underwent CAS-CABG and 63 patients who underwent CEA-CABG. The main outcomes included all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction and combined adverse events. The main outcomes of the two groups were compared at 30 days after the operation and the mid-term follow-up. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to determine the independent risk factors affecting mid-term mortality.

RESULTS

Within 30 days after the operation, there was no significant difference in combined adverse events between the two groups (P = 0.88). During the median follow-up period of 6.69 years (IQR, 5.82-7.57 years), 9 patients (14.30%) in the combined CEA-CABG group died, while 1 patient (4.00%) in the combined CAS-CABG group died. There were no significant differences in mid-term death (P = 0.20), stroke (P = 0.78), myocardial infarction (P = 0.88), or combined adverse events (P = 0.62) between the two groups. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression showed that NYHA grade IV (HR 5.01, 95% CI 1.16-21.64, P = 0.03) and previous myocardial infarction (HR 5.43, 95% CI 1.01-29.29, p = 0.04) were independent risk factors for mid-term mortality. We also found that combined CEA-CABG surgery may be associated with a higher risk of death (HR, 13.15; 95% CI 1.10-157.69, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Combined CAS-CABG is a safe and effective treatment for patients with coronary heart disease complicated with severe carotid stenosis. NYHA grade IV and previous MI were independent risk factors for mid-term mortality.

Combined Treatment With Carotid Endoarterectomy and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Single-Institutional Experience in 222 Patients

INTRODUCTION

Carotid atherosclerotic disease is a known independent risk factor of post operative stroke after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The best management of concomitant coronary artery disease and carotid artery disease remains debated. Current strategies include simultaneous carotid endoarterectomy (CEA) and CABG, staged CEA followed by CABG, staged CABG followed by CEA, staged transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TF-CAS) followed by CABG, simultaneous TF-CAS and CABG and transcarotid artery stenting.

METHODS

We report our experience based on a cohort of 222 patients undergoing combined CEA and CABG surgery who come to our observation from 2004 to 2020. All patients with >70% carotid stenosis and severe multivessel or common truncal coronary artery disease underwent combined CEA and CABG surgery at our instituion. 30% of patients had previously remote neurological symptoms or a cerebral CT-scan with ischemic lesions. Patients with carotid stenosis >70%, either asymptomatic or symptomatic, underwent CT-scan without contrast media to assess ischemic brain injury, and in some cases, if necessary, CT-angiography of the neck and intracranial vessels.

RESULTS

The overall perioperative mortality rate was 4.1% (9/222 patients). Two patients (.9%) had periprocedural ipsilateral transient ischemic attack (TIA) which completely resolved by the second postoperative day. Two patients (.9%) had an ipsilateral stroke, while 7 patients (3.2%) had a stroke of the controlateral brain hemisphere. Two patients (.9%) patients were affected by periprocedural coma caused by cerebral hypoperfusion due to perioperative heart failure. There were no statistically significant differences between patients in Extracorporeal Circulation (ECC) and Off-pump patients in the onset of perioperative stroke.

CONCLUSION

Our experience reported that combined surgical treatment of CEA and CABG, possibly Off-Pump, is a feasible treatment procedure, able to minimize the risk of post-operative stroke and cognitive deficits.

Staged Versus Synchronous Carotid Endarterectomy and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

There are several treatment options for patients with concomitant carotid and coronary artery disease, and it is difficult to identify an optimal treatment strategy that has consensus. Here, we performed a meta-analysis to compare the early and long-term outcomes of staged and synchronous carotid endarterectomy and coronary artery bypass grafting approaches.

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis that compared staged and synchronous carotid endarterectomy and coronary artery bypass grafting approaches between July 1976 and September 2021. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for related articles.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies were identified with a total of 39,269 and 30,066 patients in the synchronous and staged groups, respectively. Early mortality was lower in the staged group than in the synchronous group (odds ratio OR 1.256, 95% confidence interval CI 1.006-1.569, P= P < 0.05, I² = 54.5%), and stroke rates were significantly higher in the synchronous group (OR 1.356, 95% CI 1.232-1.493, P < 0.05, I² = 33.3%). The rate of myocardial ischemia was significantly higher in the staged group than in the synchronous group (OR 0.757, 95% CI 0.635-0.903, P < 0.05, I² = 51.5%), and this meta-analysis also showed a significantly higher risk of transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) in the synchronous group (OR 1.335, 95% CI 1.055-1.688, P < 0.05, I² = 0.00%). The secondary outcomes, including the rate of reoperation, were significantly lower for the staged procedure than for the synchronous procedure (OR 1.177, 95% CI 1.052-1.318, P < 0.05, I² = 4.2%), and the rate of wound infection was significantly higher in the synchronous group than in the staged group (OR 0.457, 95% CI 0.403-0.519, P < 0.05, I² = 0.0%). There was no significant difference in the rate of cardiac arrhythmia between the two groups (OR 0.544, 95% CI 0.265-1.117, P > 0.05, I² = 12.7%). There was also no statistical significance in the long-term results regarding the incidence of stroke, myocardial ischemia, and mortality between the synchronous and staged groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with the synchronous approach had a significantly higher risk of early mortality, stroke, TIA, wound infection, and reoperation and a lower risk of myocardial ischemia than those treated with the staged approach. There was no significant difference in the long-term results between the 2 groups.

Safety and Feasibility of Simultaneous Transcarotid Revascularization With Flow Reversal and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Concomitant Carotid Artery Stenosis and Coronary Artery Disease

OBJECTIVE

The management of patients with combined severe carotid artery and coronary artery disease (CAD) is controversial. Transcarotid stenting with flow reversal (TCAR) is a novel hybrid technique for carotid revascularization. We sought to investigate the safety and feasibility of simultaneous TCAR and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for concomitant carotid and CAD.

METHODS

A single-institution, retrospective study of patients with critical carotid artery stenosis and symptomatic CAD who underwent simultaneous TCAR-CABG was completed. The primary outcomes were technical success, perioperative stroke, death, and hemorrhage.

RESULTS

Four patients underwent TCAR-CABG. All patients were male with a mean age of 64. Technical success was achieved in all cases. There were no perioperative strokes or deaths. There were no reexplorations for hemorrhage.

CONCLUSIONS

Transcarotid stenting with flow reversal-CABG is a technically feasible hybrid approach for simultaneous carotid and coronary revascularization. It should be part of the vascular surgeon's armamentarium for coexisting carotid and coronary disease. Further research focused on patient selection and perioperative antiplatelet management is warranted prior to the widespread adoption of this technique.

Simultaneous transcarotid artery revascularization with flow reversal and coronary artery bypass grafting: A novel hybrid technique

Optimal management of concomitant coronary artery disease and carotid artery stenosis remains unknown. Current treatment strategies for patients with significant dual disease burden include simultaneous carotid endarterectomy and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or staged carotid endarterectomy and CABG. Herein we present the case of a patient with severe coronary artery disease and carotid artery stenosis and discuss a novel hybrid approach to management of concomitant coronary and carotid disease using transcarotid artery revascularization with flow reversal before CABG.

Synchronous versus Staged Carotid Endarterectomy and Coronary Artery Bypass Graft for Patients with Concomitant Severe Coronary and Carotid Artery Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Due to the systemic nature of atherosclerosis, arteries at different sites are commonly simultaneously affected. As a result, severe coronary artery disease (CAD) requiring coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) frequently coexists with significant carotid stenosis that warrants revascularization. To compare simultaneous carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and CABG versus staged CEA and CABG for patients with concomitant CAD and carotid artery stenosis in terms of perioperative outcomes.

METHODS

This study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A meta-analysis was conducted with the use of a random effects model. The I² statistic was used to assess for heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Eleven studies comprising 44,895 patients were included in this meta-analysis (21,710 in the synchronous group and 23,185 patients in the staged group). The synchronous CEA and CABG group had a statistically significant lower risk for myocardial infarction (MI) (odds ratio [OR] 0.15, 95% CI 0.04-0.61, I² = 0%) and higher risk for stroke (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.34-1.71, I² = 0%) and death (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.01-1.75, I² = 47.8%). Transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.00-1.61, I² = 0.0%), postoperative bleeding (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.22-3.05, I² = 0.0%), and pulmonary complications (OR 1.52, 95% CI 0.24-9.60, I² = 67.5%) were similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients in the simultaneous CEA and CABG group had a significantly higher risk of 30-day mortality and stroke and lower risk for MI as compared to staged CEA and CABG group. The rates of TIA, postoperative bleeding, and pulmonary complications were similar between the 2 groups. Future randomized trials or prospective cohorts are needed to validate our results.

[Immediate and intermediate results of staged carotid endarterectomy in combination with coronary artery bypass grafting]

The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the immediate and intermediate results of staged operations of carotid endarterectomy and coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with multifocal atherosclerosis. We analysed a total of 475 operations. Of these, 371 (78.1%) patients underwent staged interventions (stage 1 - carotid endarterectomy, stage 2 - coronary artery bypass grafting). No neurological complications were observed after stage 1. Five (1.3%) patients developed cardiac arrhythmia in the form of atrial fibrillation, 7 (1.9%) were found to have transient neuropathy of cranial nerves. There were no lethal outcomes. Stage 2 was carried out 16±13 days after carotid endarterectomy. Of complications encountered, mention should be made of perioperative myocardial infarction in 1 (0.3%) patient, with 2 (0.6%) patients requiring emergency coronary bypass angiography. Newly onset atrial fibrillation was registered in 71 (19.1%) patients, haemorrhage followed by resternotomy in 6 (1.6%), and purulent wound complications in 4 (1.1%) patients. Death occurred in 1 (0.3%) patient. We also analysed the mid-term postoperative results (up to 32 months). The coverage amounted to 151 patients. The incidence rate of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) was 6% (myocardial infarction - 2, acute cerebral ischaemia - 1, repeat myocardial revascularization - 5, lethal outcome - 1). Based on the obtained findings it may be concluded that staged operations on the carotid basin and coronary arteries by the number of complications are comparable to those after isolated coronary artery bypass grafting.

The effect of clinical coronary disease severity on outcomes of carotid endarterectomy with and without combined coronary bypass

OBJECTIVE

The management of patients with carotid stenosis and symptomatic coronary artery disease (CAD) is challenging. This study assessed the impact of clinical coronary disease severity on carotid endarterectomy (CEA) with and without combined coronary artery bypass (CCAB).

METHODS

Using the Vascular Quality Initiative, patients with symptomatic CAD who underwent CCAB or isolated CEA (ICEA) from 2003 to 2017 were identified. Patients were stratified by CAD severity: stable angina (SA) and recent myocardial infarction/unstable angina (UA). Primary outcomes, including perioperative stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and stroke/death/MI (SDM), were assessed between procedures within each CAD cohort.

RESULTS

There were 9098 patients identified: 887 CCAB patients (215 [24%] SA, 672 [76%] UA) and 8211 ICEA patients (6385 [78%] SA, 1826 [22%] UA). Overall, CCAB patients had higher rates of stroke (2.6% vs 1.3%; P = .002) and SDM (7.3% vs 3.5%, P < .001) but similar rates of MI (0.9% vs 1.6%; P = .12) compared with ICEA patients. In SA patients, no difference was seen in stroke (ICEA 1.2% vs CCAB 1.9%; P = .36), MI (1.3% vs 1.4%; P = .95), or SDM (2.9% vs 4.7%; P = .13). In UA patients, no difference was seen in stroke (ICEA 1.6% vs CCAB 2.8%; P = .06), but ICEA patients had higher rates of MI (2.4% vs 0.7%; P = .01) and CCAB patients had higher rates of SDM (8.2% vs 5.5%; P = .01). After logistic regression in the UA cohort, predictors of MI included ICEA (odds ratio [OR], 2.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-7.0; P = .04) and carotid symptomatic status (OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.1-3.8; P = .01); carotid symptomatic status also predicted stroke (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.1-3.6; P = .03), but CCAB did not.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with symptomatic CAD, both clinical CAD severity and operative strategy affect outcomes. In SA patients, CCAB does not increase perioperative morbidity. However, CCAB in UA patients prevents MI while not appreciably increasing stroke risk. This suggests that coronary revascularization before or concomitant with CEA should be considered in UA patients but that prioritizing coronary intervention is less important in SA patients.

Contralateral Occlusion and Concomitant Procedures Drive Risk of Non-ipsilateral Stroke After Carotid Endarterectomy

OBJECTIVES

Stroke after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has been assessed widely. However, factors enhancing non-ipsilateral stroke risk are poorly defined. The aim of this study was to identify drivers of 30 day non-ipsilateral stroke after CEA in the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) and assess long-term survival based on laterality of post-operative stroke.

METHODS

The VQI was queried between April 1, 2003, and March 31, 2017, for all CEA. Bilateral carotid procedures within 30 days were excluded. Thirty day non-ipsilateral strokes were identified. Factors were examined to discriminate between patients with and without non-ipsilateral stroke. Univariable analysis followed by multivariable logistic regression was performed. Kaplan-Meier and log rank methods were used to estimate and compare survival.

RESULTS

During this 14 year period, 80,230 CEA in 74,928 patients met the criteria. The average age was 70.3 ± 9.3 years. Most were male (48,506; 60%), Caucasian (73,967; 92%), smokers (60,543; 76%), and asymptomatic (43,074; 54%). Contralateral stenosis ≥70% was present in 8033 (10%) with 2239 (3%) having contralateral occlusion. In 491 (0.6%) patients, peri-operative non-ipsilateral stroke occurred. After characterising univariable associations, logistic regression identified independent drivers of non-ipsilateral stroke after CEA. Operative urgency (p = .001), symptomatic disease (p < .001) and contralateral occlusion (p = .001) were pre-operative drivers. Operative predictors included shunt use (p = .008), CEA with cardiac surgery (p = .013), and CEA with concomitant proximal ipsilateral endovascular intervention (p = .01). Use of dextran (p = .005) and anti-angiotensin therapy (p = .03) were protective. Reperfusion syndrome (p < .001), re-exploration (p < .001), myocardial infarction (p < .001), and intravenous treatment of hypotension (p < .001) or hypertension (p < .001) were post-operative correlates. Non-ipsilateral stroke 30 day mortality was less than ipsilateral stroke (6.1% vs. 10.3%; p = .007). Five year survival after non-ipsilateral stroke was 73%, and no different from ipsilateral stroke 76% (p = .16). Both were worse than without stroke (88%; p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Non-ipsilateral stroke after CEA is rare. Features driving risk surround global disease burden, combined procedures, and haemodynamic fluctuations. Contralateral occlusion independently increases non-ipsilateral stroke risk. Regardless of laterality or location, effects of stroke after CEA on long-term survival are similar.

Regional variation in use and outcomes of combined carotid endarterectomy and coronary artery bypass

OBJECTIVE

In treating concomitant carotid and coronary disease, some recommend staged carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and coronary artery bypass grafting, whereas others favor the combined approach (CCAB). Pressure to reduce surgical variation and to improve quality is real, yet little is known about how geographic practice differences affect outcomes. Using the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI), this study evaluated regional variation in use and outcomes of CCAB.

METHODS

All CCAB procedures in the VQI from 2003 to 2017 were reviewed and stratified into four regions, as defined by the United States Census Bureau. Primary outcomes included perioperative stroke, death, myocardial infarction (MI), and these as composite (SDM). A χ² analysis was performed.

RESULTS

There were 1495 CCAB procedures identified, representing 1.8% of the VQI CEAs. Regions included the following: Midwest (MW), 32%; Northeast (NE), 39%; South (S), 25%; and West (W), 4%. Most were male (70%) and white (92%). There was significant regional variation in proportional volume of CCABs to all CEAs (0.7% [W] to 2.5% [MW]; P < .001). Regional variation in patch use (78% [W] to 93% [MW]; P < .001), shunting (29% [W] to 71% [MW]; P < .001), and electroencephalography monitoring (13% [W] to 52% [NE]; P < .001) was also significant. Overall perioperative stroke was 3.6%; death, 3.0%; and SDM, 6.8%. No regional difference was seen in outcomes of mortality (1.5% [MW] to 4.2% [NE]; P = .05), stroke (2.8% [NE] to 4.4% [MW]; P = .52), and MI (0.6% [MW] to 1.8% [W]; P = .62). When the Bonferroni correction was used, there remained no difference in stroke, MI, or SDM across regions, but mortality became significant. Using the Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines for consideration of CCAB, the minority of patients fell within the symptomatic carotid stenosis (SYMP, 15%; n = 218) or severe (≥70%) asymptomatic bilateral carotid disease (BIL, 18%; n = 267) categories. The most common indication was asymptomatic unilateral severe carotid stenosis (UNI, 37%; n = 552). There were no differences in regional outcomes stratified by indication (SYMP, BIL, UNI). Overall, when SYMP and BIL were compared with UNI, UNI had lower rates of stroke (2.4% vs 4.9%; P = .03) but similar MI (0.7% vs 1.2%; P = .40) and mortality (2.2% vs 2.5%; P = .75).

CONCLUSIONS

Significant variation exists across VQI centers in the use of CCAB. Despite differences in volume and practices, regional perioperative outcomes are similar. UNI is the most commonly used indication and has lower stroke rates relative to SYMP and BIL. CCAB is performed well across the United States, but most patients fall outside of Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines.

Contemporary Management of Patients with Concomitant Coronary and Carotid Artery Disease

The ideal management of concomitant carotid and coronary artery occlusive disease remains elusive. Although researchers have advocated the potential benefits of varying treatment strategies based on either concomitant or staged surgical treatment, there is no consensus in treatment guidelines among national or international clinical societies. Clinical studies show that coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with either staged or synchronous carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is associated with a high procedural stroke or death rate. Recent clinical studies have found carotid artery stenting (CAS) prior to CABG can lead to superior treatment outcomes in asymptomatic patients who are deemed high risk of CEA. With emerging data suggesting favorable outcome of CAS compared to CEA in patients with critical coronary artery disease, physicians must consider these diverging therapeutic options when treating patients with concurrent carotid and coronary disease. This review examines the available clinical data on therapeutic strategies in patients with concomitant carotid and coronary artery disease. A treatment paradigm for considering CAS or CEA as well as CABG and percutaneous coronary intervention is discussed.

Safety of Simultaneous Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting and Carotid Endarterectomy Versus Isolated Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The optimal operative strategy in patients with severe carotid artery disease undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is unknown. We sought to investigate the safety and efficacy of synchronous combined carotid endarterectomy and CABG as compared with isolated CABG.

METHODS

Patients with asymptomatic high-grade carotid artery stenosis ≥80% according to ECST (European Carotid Surgery Trial) ultrasound criteria (corresponding to ≥70% NASCET [North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial]) who required CABG surgery were randomly assigned to synchronous carotid endarterectomy+CABG or isolated CABG. To avoid unbalanced prognostic factor distributions, randomization was stratified by center, age, sex, and modified Rankin Scale. The primary composite end point was the rate of stroke or death at 30 days.

RESULTS

From 2010 to 2014, a total of 129 patients were enrolled at 17 centers in Germany and the Czech Republic. Because of withdrawal of funding after insufficient recruitment, enrolment was terminated early. At 30 days, the rate of any stroke or death in the intention-to-treat population was 12/65 (18.5%) in patients receiving synchronous carotid endarterectomy+CABG as compared with 6/62 (9.7%) in patients receiving isolated CABG (absolute risk reduction, 8.8%; 95% confidence interval, -3.2% to 20.8%; P_WALD=0.12). Also for all secondary end points at 30 days and 1 year, there was no evidence for a significant treatment-group effect although patients undergoing isolated CABG tended to have better outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Although our results cannot rule out a treatment-group effect because of lack of power, a superiority of the synchronous combined carotid endarterectomy+CABG approach seems unlikely. Five-year follow-up of patients is still ongoing.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.controlled-trials.com. Unique identifier: ISRCTN13486906.

[Simultaneous brachiocephalic arteries reconstruction and coronary artery bypass grafting]

It is presented the results of simultaneous surgical treatment of 55 patients with brachiocephalic arteries lesion and ischemic heart disease. All patients underwent reconstructive operations on brachiocephalic arteries and CABG. The features of diagnosis and surgical stage are described. The indications for this method are defined. The authors studied russian and world experience; complications of simultaneous operations are presented. It is suggested ways for improvement of results of simultaneous reconstructions.

Does preoperative carotid stenosis screening reduce perioperative stroke in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting?

A number of institutions routinely perform carotid artery ultrasound screening before coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) to identify carotid artery disease requiring revascularization before or during CABG, with the expectation of reducing perioperative neurologic events. The assumptions are that carotid disease is causally related to perioperative stroke and that prophylactic carotid revascularization decreases the risk of post-CABG neurologic events. Although carotid artery stenosis is a known risk factor for perioperative stroke in patients undergoing CABG, it might be a surrogate marker for diffuse atherosclerotic disease rather than a direct etiologic factor. Moreover, the benefit of prophylactic carotid revascularization in patients with asymptomatic unilateral carotid disease is uncertain. Therefore, we have reviewed the literature for evidence that preoperative carotid artery screening, by identifying patients with significant carotid artery stenosis and altering their management, reduces perioperative neurologic events in those undergoing CABG.

Twenty-four hour staged carotid endarterectomy followed by off-pump coronary bypass grafting for patients with concomitant carotid and coronary disease

BACKGROUND

Carotid artery stenosis and coronary artery disease share common risk factors and often coexist in the same patient. Currently, no consensus exists regarding the optimal treatment strategy for patients with concomitant severe coronary and carotid disease. We reviewed the results of our experience performing off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) within 24 hours of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in this select patient population.

METHODS

In this single institution retrospective study we identified patients who underwent CEA followed by CABG from March 2001 to March 2012. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Ninety patients underwent CEA followed by off-pump CABG. The duration between CEA and CABG was 1.8±5.6 days with 80 (89%) within 24 hours. Mean age was 69±9 years, 68% male. Perioperative comorbidities included hypertension (87%), diabetes (50%), previous myocardial infarction (24%), peripheral arterial disease (20%), and strokes and transient ischemic attack (16%). Extensive aortic atherosclerosis was noted in 15 patients (17%). The average number of vessels bypassed was 3.4±1.0, and the average number of proximal vein aortotomies was 1.7±0.92. Post-CEA surgical outcomes were myocardial infarction (1%), acute embolic cerebrovascular accident (1%), left upper extremity weakness (1%), and hypoglossal nerve injury (1%). Post-CABG surgical outcomes included atrial fibrillation (34%), anemia (12%), pneumothorax (7%), and postoperative bleeding (4%). No post-CABG cerebrovascular accident was identified. Patients were discharged 7.5±3.5 days after CEA.

CONCLUSIONS

Twenty-four hour staged CEA followed by CABG minimizes myocardial infarction post-CEA while minimizing cerebrovascular accident post-CABG in patients with concomitant severe coronary and carotid artery disease.

Perioperative management of combined carotid and coronary artery bypass grafting procedures

The objective of this review is to provide a high level overview on current thinking for treatment of patients with combined carotid and coronary artery disease given that these patients are at higher risk of adverse cardiac events, stroke, and death. This review discusses (1) the current literature addressing perioperative stroke risk in the setting of coronary artery bypass graft, (2) the literature regarding different surgical approaches when both carotid and coronary revascularization are being considered, and (3) the data available to guide optimal management of this complex patient population to minimize complications regardless of the surgical approach taken.

Long-term outcomes of synchronous carotid endarterectomy and coronary artery bypass grafting versus solely carotid endarterectomy

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of combined carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with solely CEA.

METHODS

During a five-year period ending December 2009, 25 consecutive patients received concomitant CEA and CABG, whereas, 62 consecutive patients underwent only CEA. They were followed at the median for 64.5 months. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to evaluate the survival rate of patients in both groups.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in terms of age, proportion of gender, risk factors of coronary artery disease and carotid artery stenosis. The degree of carotid artery stenosis was identical in both study groups. One patient in CEA/CABG group had 60% stenosis of carotid artery with ulcerative plaque. There was no early death in the short postoperative period. Restenosis was found on ultrasonography in 4 patients in the CEA/CABG group, and 12 patients in the CEA group; no statistical difference was found between both groups (P = 0.952). The intubation time, ICU stay, and hospital stay in CEA/CABG group were longer than in solely CEA group (P <0.001). The median duration of follow-up was 64.5 months (IQR 24-84 months). The survival rate was 88 %(22/25) in CEA/CABG group and 80.6 %(50/62) in CEA group, product-limit analysis showed that there was no significant difference in survival rates between two groups (P >0.05).

CONCLUSION

concomitant carotid endarterectomy and CABG can be safely performed, it could prevent stroke and would not increase the overall risk of surgery.

Management of carotid disease in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery: is it time to change our approach?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The management of concurrent severe carotid and coronary disease is a subject of ongoing debate in the absence of randomized clinical trials. Amidst the growing controversy, the clinician has to carefully tailor the best strategy for a given patient based on neurologic and cardiac symptoms. This review aims to compile current evidence in this area to help plan strategies for the optimal management of coexisting severe carotid and coronary disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

Carotid revascularization with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or stenting (CAS) is frequently performed in conjunction with coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) in the United States for asymptomatic carotid disease. The risk of perioperative stroke with unilateral asymptomatic 70-99% carotid stenosis is likely small based on several observational data. Moreover, the risk associated with both staged and combined CEA-CABG procedures in the asymptomatic population may outweigh any benefit. Carotid artery stenting is an alternative option in patients with severe coronary disease who are considered 'high risk' for CEA. Neurologically symptomatic patients require carotid revascularization prior to or in conjunction with CABG surgery. Ultimately, the choice of carotid revascularization or conservative management will depend on clinical characteristics, anatomy, and local expertise.

SUMMARY

Severe carotid disease in the CABG population is often unilateral and asymptomatic. Based on the available data, conservative carotid therapy in the low-risk asymptomatic individuals is likely the best treatment option. Carotid revascularization may be justified in symptomatic or high-risk patients such as those with contralateral carotid occlusion or bilateral severe stenosis.

Staged versus synchronous carotid endarterectomy and coronary artery bypass grafting: analysis of 10-year nationwide outcomes

BACKGROUND

The timing of operative interventions for patients with concurrent carotid and coronary artery disease is controversial. We evaluated nationwide data regarding staged or synchronous carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and compared the two approaches' outcome profiles.

METHODS

From Nationwide Inpatient Sample database 1998 to 2007, we identified 6,153 (28.9%) patients who underwent CEA before or after CABG during the same hospital admission but not on the same day (STAGED) and 16,639 patients who underwent both procedures on the same day (SYNC). Hierarchic multivariable regression was used to assess the independent effect of operative strategy on mortality, neurologic and overall complications, and charges.

RESULTS

Mean age (69.5±9.0 years) and Charlson-Deyo score (4.6±1.5) were similar for both groups. Mortality (4.2% vs 4.5%) or neurologic complications (3.5% vs 3.9%) were similar between the STAGED and SYNC groups (p>0.7 for both). The STAGED patients had higher morbidity (48.4% vs 42.6%; odds ratio [OR] 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5 to 2.2; p<0.001) and more cardiac (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.4 to 1.7; p<0.001), wound (OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.8 to 2.4; p<0.001), respiratory (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.3; p=0.001), and renal complications (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.3; p<0.001). In SYNC patients, on-pump CABG increased stroke rates (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.3 to 1.9; p<0.001). The STAGED procedures were independently associated with higher hospital charges by $23,328 (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

We identified no significant difference in mortality or neurologic complications between STAGED and SYNC approaches. Staged procedures were associated with a greater risk of overall complications and higher hospital charges than SYNC. On-pump CABG was associated with higher stroke rates in SYNC patients.