Synchronous Carotid Endarterectomy and Off-pump Coronary Bypass: An Updated, Systematic Review of Early Outcomes

Early and Long-Term Results of Simultaneous and Staged Revascularization of Coronary and Carotid Arteries

BACKGROUND

Carotid artery disease is prevalent among patients with coronary heart disease. The concomitant severe lesions in the carotid and coronary arteries may necessitate either simultaneous or staged revascularization involving coronary bypass and carotid endarterectomy. However, there is presently a lack of consensus on the optimal choice of surgical treatment tactics for patients with significant stenoses in both carotid and coronary arteries. The aim of the current study was to compare the 30-day and long-term outcomes of coronary and carotid artery revascularization surgery based on the simultaneous or staged surgical tactics.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This single-center retrospective study involved 192 patients with concurrent coronary artery disease and carotid artery stenosis ≥ 70%, of whom 106 patients underwent simultaneous intervention (CABG + CEA) and 86 patients underwent staged CABG/CEA. The mean time between stages ranged from 1 to 4 months (mean 1.88 ± 0.9 months). The endpoints included death from any cause, non-fatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) (death + non-fatal MI + non-fatal stroke) within 30 days after the last intervention and in the long-term follow-up period (median follow-up-6 years).

RESULTS

The 30-day all-cause mortality, incidence of postoperative non-fatal MI, non-fatal stroke, and MACEs did not exhibit differences between the groups after single-stage and staged interventions. However, the overall risk of postoperative complications (adjusted for the risk of any complication per patient) (OR 2.214, 95% CI 1.048-4.674, p = 0.035), as well as the duration of ventilatory support (p = 0.004), was elevated in the group after simultaneous interventions compared with the staged intervention group. This difference did not result in an increased incidence of death and MACEs in the group after simultaneous interventions. In the long-term follow-up period, there were no significant differences observed when comparing simultaneous or staged surgical tactics in terms of overall survival (54.9% and 62.6% in Groups 1 and 2, respectively, P log-rank = 0.068), non-fatal stroke-free survival (45.6% and 33.6% in Groups 1 and 2, respectively, P log-rank = 0.364), non-fatal MI-survival (57.6% and 73.5% in Groups 1 and 2, respectively, P log-rank = 0.169), and MACE-free survival (7.1% and 30.2% in Groups 1 and 2, respectively, P log-rank = 0.060). The risk factors associated with an unfavorable outcome included age, smoking, BMI, LV EF, and atherosclerosis of the lower extremity arteries.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed no significant difference in the impact of simultaneous CABG + CEA or staged CABG/CEA on the incidence of death, stroke, MI, and MACEs over a 30-day and long-term follow-up period. Although the immediate results indicated an increased risk of a complicated course (attributable to overall complications) and more prolonged ventilation after simultaneous CABG + CEA compared with staged CABG/CEA, this did not lead to an increase in fatal complications. Therefore, the implementation of either tactic is considered eligible and appropriate following a thorough operative risk assessment.

Synchronous Carotid Endarterectomy and Anaortic Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery

BACKGROUND

There is ongoing debate regarding the optimal strategy and timing for the surgical management of patients with severe concomitant carotid and coronary artery disease. Anaortic off-pump coronary artery bypass (anOPCAB), which avoids aortic manipulation and cardiopulmonary bypass, has been shown to reduce the risk of perioperative stroke. We present the outcomes of a series of synchronous carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and anOPCAB.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed. The primary endpoint was stroke at 30 days post-operation. Secondary endpoints included transient ischaemic attack, myocardial infarction and mortality 30 days post-operation.

RESULTS

From 2009 to 2016, 1,041 patients underwent anOPCAB with a 30-day stroke rate of 0.4%. The majority of patients had preoperative carotid-subclavian duplex ultrasound screening and 39 were identified with significant concomitant carotid disease who underwent synchronous CEA-anOPCAB. The mean age was 71±7.5 years. Nine patients (23.1%) had previous neurological events. Thirty (30) patients (76.9%) underwent an urgent operation. For CEA, a conventional longitudinal carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty was performed in all patients. For anOPCAB, total arterial revascularisation rate was performed in 84.6% and the mean number of distal anastomoses was 2.9±0.7. In the 30-day postoperative period, there was one stroke (2.63%), two deaths (5.26%), two transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) (5.26%) and no myocardial infarction. Two patients experienced acute kidney injury (5.26%), one of which required haemodialysis (2.63%). Mean length of stay was 11.37±7.9 days.

CONCLUSION

Synchronous CEA and anOPCAB is a safe and effective option for patients' severe concomitant disease. Preoperative carotid-subclavian ultrasound screening allows identification of these patients.

[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.

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.

Carotid artery stenting followed by open heart surgery in 323 patients: One-year results and influencing factors

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate 1-year results and influencing factors of carotid artery stenting (CAS) before open heart surgery (OHS).

BACKGROUND

Currently, the clinical outcomes and influencing factors of CAS followed by OHS still remain controversial.

METHODS

Three hundred twenty-three consecutive patients scheduled for CAS and OHS were enrolled in this study. The primary endpoint was a composite of major stroke, myocardial infarction, or death within 1 year after CAS.

RESULTS

The incidence of the primary endpoint was 5.6% (18/323). The Cox regression analysis revealed that an interval of ≤5 days between CAS and OHS (HR, 4.85, 95% CI, 1.87-12.58; P = 0.001), congestive heart failure (HR, 4.08, 95% CI, 1.45-11.51; P = 0.008), and renal insufficiency (HR, 4.56, 95% CI, 1.28-16.32; P = 0.020) could independently predict the incidence of the primary endpoint. The rate of the primary endpoint from CAS to 30 days after OHS was 4.6% (15/323). An interval of ≤5 days between CAS and OHS (OR, 4.51, 95% CI, 1.52-13.36; P = 0.007) and congestive heart failure (OR, 5.32, 95% CI, 1.63-17.43; P = 0.006) were identified as independent risk factors for the primary endpoint rate from CAS to 30 days after OHS by logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

CAS followed by OHS is a safe and effective treatment for patients with concomitant carotid and cardiac disease within 1-year follow up. The interval between CAS and OHS, congestive heart failure, and renal insufficiency could obviously influence the 1-year results.

Approach to concurrent coronary and carotid artery disease: Epidemiology, screening and treatment

Summary The concomitance between coronary artery disease and carotid artery disease is known and well documented. However, it is a fact that, despite the screening methods for these conditions and the advances in surgical treatment, little has been achieved in terms of reducing the risk of complications in the perioperative period. Publications are scarce, being mostly composed of reports or case series. There is little agreement on the best initial therapeutic approach (myocardial versus carotid revascularization) or the best technique to be used (surgery with or without extracorporeal circulation, hybrid treatments, etc.). The authors performed a review of the evidence in this clinical scenario, raising pragmatic questions that help in the therapeutic decision.

Comparison of Trends and In-Hospital Outcomes of Concurrent Carotid Artery Revascularization and Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: The United States Experience 2004 to 2012

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare trends and outcomes of 3 approaches to carotid revascularization in the coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) population when performed during the same hospitalization.

BACKGROUND

The optimal approach to managing coexisting severe carotid and coronary disease remains controversial. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) are used to decrease the risk of stroke in patients with carotid disease undergoing CABG surgery.

METHODS

The authors conducted a serial, cross-sectional study with time trends of 3 revascularization groups during the same hospital admission: 1) combined CEA+CABG; 2) staged CEA+CABG; and 3) staged CAS+CABG from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database 2004 to 2012. The primary composite endpoints were in-hospital all-cause death, stroke, and death/stroke.

RESULTS

During the 9-year period, 22,501 concurrent carotid revascularizations and CABG surgeries during the same hospitalization were performed. Of these, 15,402 (68.4%) underwent combined CEA+CABG, 6,297 (28.0%) underwent staged CEA+CABG, and 802 (3.6%) underwent staged CAS+CABG. The overall rate of CEA+CABG decreased by 16.1% (p_trend = 0.03) from 2004 to 2012, whereas the rate of CAS+CABG did not significantly change during these years (p_trend = 0.10). The adjusted risk of death was greater, whereas risk of stroke was lower with both combined CEA+CABG (death odds ratio [OR]: 2.08, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08 to 3.97; p = 0.03; stroke OR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.42 to 1.01; p = 0.06) and staged CEA+CABG (death OR: 2.40, 95% CI: 1.43 to 4.05; p = 0.001; stroke OR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.80; p = 0.004) approaches compared with CAS+CABG. The adjusted risk of death or stroke was similar in the 3 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with concomitant carotid and coronary disease undergoing combined revascularization, combined CEA+CABG is utilized most frequently, followed by staged CEA+CABG and staged CAS+CABG strategies. The staged CAS+CABG strategy was associated with lower risk of mortality, but higher risk of stroke. Future studies are needed to examine the risks/benefits of different carotid revascularization strategies for high-risk patients requiring concurrent CABG.

Comparison of Early Outcomes with Three Approaches for Combined Coronary Revascularization and Carotid Endarterectomy

Objective

This study aims to compare three different surgical approaches for combined coronary and carotid artery stenosis as a single stage procedure and to assess effect of operative strategy on mortality and neurological complications.

Methods

This retrospective study involves 136 patients who had synchronous coronary artery revascularization and carotid endarterectomy in our institution, between January 2002 and December 2012. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to the surgical technique used. Group I included 70 patients who had carotid endarterectomy, followed by coronary revascularization with on-pump technique, group II included 29 patients who had carotid endarterectomy, followed by coronary revascularization with off-pump technique, group III included 37 patients who had coronary revascularization with on-pump technique followed by carotid endarterectomy under aortic cross-clamp and systemic hypothermia (22-27ºC). Postoperative outcomes were evaluated.

Results

Overall early mortality and stroke rate was 5.1% for both. There were 3 (4.3%) deaths in group I, 2 (6.9%) deaths in group II and 2 (5.4%) deaths in group III. Stroke was observed in 5 (7.1%) patients in group I and 2 (6.9%) in group II. Stroke was not observed in group III. No statistically significant difference was observed for mortality and stroke rates among the groups.

Conclusion

We identified no significant difference in mortality or neurologic complications among three approaches for synchronous surgery for coronary and carotid disease. Therefore it is impossible to conclude that a single principle might be adapted into standard practice. Patient specific risk factors and clinical conditions might be important in determining the surgical tecnnique.

The interval between carotid artery stenting and open heart surgery is related to perioperative complications

OBJECTIVES

To assess 30-day outcomes and the optimal interval between carotid artery stenting (CAS) and open heart surgery (OHS).

BACKGROUND

Whether or not they show symptoms of carotid atherosclerosis, patients with significant carotid stenosis who underwent OHS face a high risk of perioperative stroke. Planning appropriate treatment for carotid stenosis before OHS has become an important clinical issue.

METHODS

From January 2005 to June 2010, 154 inpatients scheduled for CAS and OHS were recruited and followed up for 30 days after OHS. The primary end point was a composite of major stroke or neurological death. The secondary end points included a composite of major stroke, myocardial infarction (MI) or any death, minor stroke, and acute kidney injury (AKI).

RESULTS

The incidence of the primary end point, the composite of major stroke, MI or any death, minor stroke and AKI was 3.2%, 5.8%, 2.6%, and 4.5%, respectively. Only an interval between CAS and OHS of ≤5 days could independently predict the incidence of the primary end point (OR, 14.06, 95% CI, 1.52-130.13; P=0.020). Moreover, congestive heart failure (OR, 7.07, 95% CI, 1.55-21.27; P=0.012) and an interval between CAS and OHS of ≤5 days (OR, 7.05, 95% CI, 1.58-31.40; P=0.010) were identified as independent risk factors for the composite of major stroke, MI, or any death.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that CAS followed by OHS is safe and feasible. More importantly, an interval between CAS and OHS of >5 days may decrease periprocedural complications, especially major stroke and neurological death.

Intraoperative Changes in Cerebrospinal Fluid Gas Tensions Reflect Paraplegia During Thoracoabdominal Aortic Surgery

Background:

In this study, gas tensions in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) were prospectively evaluated as intraoperative markers for the detection of neurological deficits.

Methods:

Spinal fluid, serum, and heart lung machine (HLM) perfusate were monitored for gas tensions (po2/pCo2) and related parameters (pH, lactate, and glucose) during thoracoabdominal aortic repair and correlated with perioperative neurological examination and electrophysiological testing.

Results:

Forty-seven patients were assessed for the study, and 40 consecutive patients were finally included. The patients were divided into 3 groups: group A (23 patients, 57.5%): no clinical or laboratory signs of neurological damage; group B (14 patients, 35%) who developed subclinical deficits; and group C (3 patients, 7.5%) who had paraplegia. Significant intraoperative changes in CSF gas tensions were observed with postoperative paraplegia. Glucose ratio between serum and CSF showed higher variability in group C, confirming a damage of the blood–brain barrier (BBB).

Conclusion:

Major neurological damage is reflected by early changes in CSF gas tensions and glucose variability, suggesting damage of the BBB in these patients.

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.

Importance of strict patient selection criteria for combined carotid endarterectomy and coronary artery bypass grafting

BACKGROUND

Management of patients with severe concomitant carotid and coronary disease remains controversial. We report our experience of combined carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) over a fifteen year period using strict patient selection criteria.

METHODS

From 1st January 1995 to December 31st 2009 165 patients underwent combined CABG/CEA procedures at the Mater Hospital. Mean age was 68.2 years (range 43-88) and 127 (77%) were male. Fifty-three (32%) had symptomatic carotid disease. Indications for combined procedures were the presence of symptomatic >70% or asymptomatic >80% internal carotid artery stenosis in a patient requiring urgent CABG because of either unstable angina, recent MI, severe triple vessel disease or severe Left Anterior Descending or Left Main Stem stenosis.

RESULTS

Thirty-day stroke and death rate was 3%. All neurological events were in the hemisphere contralateral to the carotid surgery and symptoms had completely resolved prior to discharge from hospital. One patient required evacuation of a cervical haematoma and there were two transient XII nerve palsies.

CONCLUSION

Combined CEA/CABG can be performed safely with acceptable morbidity and mortality in patients selected in accordance with strict criteria in a centre with a large experience of both cardiac and carotid surgery.

Regional use of combined carotid endarterectomy/coronary artery bypass graft and the effect of patient risk

INTRODUCTION

Although carotid artery stenosis and coronary artery disease often coexist, many debate which patients are best served by combined concurrent revascularization (carotid endarterectomy [CEA]/coronary artery bypass graft [CABG]). We studied the use of CEA/CABG in New England and compared indications and outcomes, including stratification by risk, symptoms, and performing center.

METHODS

Using data from the Vascular Study Group of New England from 2003 to 2009, we studied all patients who underwent combined CEA/CABG across six centers in New England. Our main outcome measure was in-hospital stroke or death. We compared outcomes between all patients undergoing combined CEA/CABG to a baseline CEA risk group comprised of patients undergoing isolated CEA at non-CEA/CABG centers. Further, we compared in-hospital stroke and death rates between high and low neurologic risk patients, defining high neurologic risk patients as those who had at least one of the following clinical or anatomic features: (1) symptomatic carotid disease, (2) bilateral carotid stenosis >70%, (3) ipsilateral stenosis >70% and contralateral occlusion, or (4) ipsilateral or bilateral occlusion.

RESULTS

Overall, compared to patients undergoing isolated CEA at non-CEA/CABG centers (n = 1563), patients undergoing CEA/CABG (n = 109) were more likely to have diabetes (44% vs 29%; P = .001), creatinine >1.8 mg/dL (11% vs 5%; P = .007), and congestive heart failure (23% vs 10%; P < .001). Patients undergoing CEA/CABG were also more likely to take preoperative beta-blockers (94% vs 75%; P < .001) and less likely to take preoperative clopidogrel (7% vs 25%; P < .001). Patients undergoing CEA/CABG had higher rates of contralateral carotid occlusion (13% vs 5%; P = .001) and were more likely to undergo an urgent/emergent procedure (30% vs 15%; P < .001). The risk of complications was higher in CEA/CABG compared to isolated CEA, including increased risk of stroke (5.5% vs 1.2%; P < .001), death (5.5% vs 0.3%; P < .001), and return to the operating room for any reason (7.6% vs 1.2%; P < .001). Of 109 patients undergoing CEA/CABG, 61 (56%) were low neurologic risk and 48 (44%) were high neurologic risk but showed no demonstrable difference in stroke (4.9% vs 6.3%; P = .76), death, (4.9 vs 6.3%; P = .76), or return to the operating room (10.2% vs 4.3%; P = .25).

CONCLUSIONS

Although practice patterns in the use of CEA/CABG vary across our region, the risk of complications with CEA/CABG remains significantly higher than in isolated CEA. Future work to improve patient selection in CEA/CABG is needed to improve perioperative results with combined coronary and carotid revascularization.

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.

Treatment strategies in severe symptomatic carotid and coronary artery disease

Coexistent carotid artery stenosis (CS) and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) is not infrequent. One in 5 patients with multivessel CAD has a severe CS, and CAD incidence reaches 80% in those referred for carotid revascularization. We reviewed treatment strategies for concomitant severe CS and CAD.

We performed a literature search (MEDLINE) with terms including carotid artery stenting (CAS), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), carotid endarterectomy (CEA), stroke, and myocardial infarction (MI).

The main therapeutic option for CS-CAD has been (simultaneous or staged) CEA-CABG. This, however, is associated with a high risk of MI (in those with CEA prior to CABG) or stroke (CABG prior to CEA), and the cumulative major adverse event rate (MAE – death, stroke or MI) reaches 10–12%. With increasing adoption of CAS, a sequential strategy of CAS followed by CABG has emerged. Registries (usually single-centre) indicate an MAE rate of ≈7% for CAS followed by CABG (frequently after >30 days, due to double antiplatelet therapy). Recently, 1-stage CAS-CABG has been introduced. This involves different antiplatelet regimens and, in some centers, preferred off-pump CABG, with a cumulative MAE of 1.4–4.5%.

No randomized trial comparing different treatment strategies in CS-CAD has been conducted, and thus far reported series are prone to selection/reporting bias. In addition to the established surgical treatment (CEA-CABG, sequential/simultaneous), hybrid revascularization (CAS-CABG) is emerging as a viable therapeutic option. Larger, preferably multi-centre, studies are required before this can become widely applied.

Simultaneous approach of internal carotid artery revascularization at the base of the skull and coronary arteries bypass without extracorporeal circulation

The best surgical approach for the treatment of patients with severe cerebral artery disease and simultaneous serious coronary artery disease remains controversial. In this report, we present a case of a 65-year-old man admitted to the hospital with unstable angina. Triple coronary artery obstructive disease and severe right internal carotid artery stenosis in the retroparotid region were diagnosed. A combined, simultaneous surgical procedure was performed. A lesion located in the retroparotid space required an approach by a presternocleidomastoid cervicotomy extended distally. Venous grafting of the internal carotid artery was performed. After carotid reconstruction, the three coronary arteries were revascularized without extracorporeal circulation. The patient showed a satisfactory postoperative outcome.

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.

Asymptomatic carotid disease and cardiac surgery consensus

The Carotid Disease and Cardiac Surgery Consensus Meeting was convened as a multidisciplinary gathering to consider the management of patients undergoing cardiac surgery who are found to have asymptomatic carotid artery disease. There are no randomized trials concerning whether carotid interventions are of value in this situation and the natural history is unclear. Bilateral carotid artery disease (≥70% stenosis) should be regarded clinically relevant when considering hemodynamic and short-term surgical stroke risk. However, this may be because the presence of significant carotid disease is also a marker for aortic arch and intracerebral disease. A natural history study is urgently needed to determine the incidence, predictive factors, and natural history of asymptomatic carotid disease in patients undergoing contemporary cardiac surgical interventions to inform the design of any future randomized trial.

Neurologic complications of cardiac surgery and interventional cardiac procedures

Neurologic complications of cardiac surgery and interventional cardiac procedures may affect the central nervous system or the peripheral nervous system. The most common central nervous system complications are strokes and seizures. This article provides a succinct neuroanatomic and pathophysiologic approach to a wide array of neurologic complications associated with cardiac procedures.

Combined carotid and cardiac surgery: improving the results

BACKGROUND

Aim of this study was to analyze our experience in the last 5 years of combined carotid and cardiac surgery.

METHODS

During a 5-year period (January 2002-December 2006), 111 patients underwent combined carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (group 1), while 1,446 patients underwent isolated CEA (group 2). Perioperative outcomes in the two groups were compared using chi(2) and Fisher's exact tests to analyze neurological deficits, cardiac events, and death at 30 days. Results during follow-up were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves, and both groups were compared using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

Immediate postoperative neurological deficits occurred more frequently in group 1 patients (2.5 vs. 0.4%, p = 0.002), with a higher incidence of transient ischemic attacks in group 1; however, there was no difference in the incidence of stroke (1% group 1 vs. 0.6% group 2, p = n.s.). Mortality rate was increased in the combined surgery group (3.5 vs. 0.5%, p < 0.001). Combined stroke/myocardial infarction/death rate at 30 days was 6.3% in group 1 compared with 1.4% in group 2, p = 0.001. Perioperative stroke/myocardial infarction/death rate was much improved in the 55% (61/111) of patients undergoing CABG off-pump (3.3 vs. 10%, p = 0.001). Mean follow-up was 18.7 months (range, 1-60). Survival at 24 months was significantly higher in patients of group 2 compared with group 1 (99.4 vs. 91.3% respectively, p < 0.001). At 24 months, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the risk of developing ipsilateral or contralateral neurologic events (3.1% group 1 vs. 1.7% group 2).

CONCLUSION

In our experience, combined CEA and cardiac surgery carries a higher risk of perioperative mortality than patients undergoing isolated CEA. Whenever possible, CEA combined with off-pump CABG seems to be the therapeutic strategy of choice.