Trends and outcomes of concurrent carotid revascularization and coronary bypass

Concomitant Carotid and Coronary Artery Disease Management: A Review of The Literature

This review examines current evidence regarding management of patients with both coronary and carotid artery disease. It highlights the elevated stroke risk after surgery for this cohort and scrutinizes approaches to minimize this risk. Various revascularization methods are outlined, including carotid endarterectomy (CEA), carotid artery stenting (CAS), and staged versus simultaneous surgical approaches. The importance of judiciously screening coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) candidates for carotid stenosis is emphasized, suggesting risk factor-based targeted screening is non-inferior to indiscriminate screening. Efficacy comparisons are made between revascularization strategies such as staged versus synchronous CEA/CABG, CAS, and off-pump CABG techniques. Controversies surrounding necessity and optimal timing of carotid revascularization in asymptomatic patients are addressed, indicating a need for rigorous randomized controlled trials to establish definitive treatment algorithms.

A meta-analysis supporting the superiority of staged carotid artery stenting and coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with concurrent severe coronary and carotid artery stenosis

BACKGROUND

This study sought to ascertain whether a staged approach involving carotid artery stenting (CAS) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) holds superiority over the synchronous (Syn) strategy of CAS or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and CABG in patients necessitating combined revascularization for concurrent carotid and coronary artery disease.

METHOD

Studies were identified through 3 databases: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Statistical significance was defined as a P value of less than .05 for all analyses, conducted using STATA version 12.0.

RESULTS

In the comparison between staged versus Syn CAS and CABG for patients with concomitant severe coronary and carotid stenosis, 4 studies were analyzed. The staged procedure was associated with a lower rate of 30-day stroke (OR = 8.329, 95% CI = 1.017-69.229, P = .048) compared to Syn CAS and CABG. In the comparison between staged CAS and CABG versus Syn CEA and CABG for patients with concomitant severe coronary and carotid stenosis, 5 studies were examined. The staged CAS and CABG procedure was associated with a lower rate of mortality (OR = 2.046, 95% CI = 1.304-3.210, P = .002) compared to Syn CEA and CABG.

CONCLUSION

The Syn CAS and CABG was linked to a higher risk of peri-operative stroke compared to staged CAS and CABG. Additionally, patients undergoing staged CAS and CABG exhibited a significantly decreased risk of 30-day mortality compared to Syn CEA and CABG. Future randomized trials or prospective cohorts are essential to confirm and validate these findings.

Brazilian Angiology and Vascular Surgery Society Guidelines for the treatment of extracranial cerebrovascular disease

Extracranial cerebrovascular disease has been the subject of intense research throughout the world, and is of paramount importance for vascular surgeons. This guideline, written by the Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery (SBACV), supersedes the 2015 guideline. Non-atherosclerotic carotid artery diseases were not included in this document. The purpose of this guideline is to bring together the most robust evidence in this area in order to help specialists in the treatment decision-making process. The AGREE II methodology and the European Society of Cardiology system were used for recommendations and levels of evidence. The recommendations were graded from I to III, and levels of evidence were classified as A, B, or C. This guideline is divided into 11 chapters dealing with the various aspects of extracranial cerebrovascular disease: diagnosis, treatments and complications, based on up-to-date knowledge and the recommendations proposed by SBACV.

Eptifibatide bridging therapy for staged carotid artery stenting and cardiac surgery: Safety and feasibility

BACKGROUND

Prophylactic carotid artery stenting (CAS) is an effective strategy to reduce perioperative stroke in patients with severe carotid stenosis who require cardiothoracic surgery (CTS). Staging both procedures (CAS-CTS) during a single hospitalization presents conflicting demands for antiplatelet therapy and the optimal pharmacologic strategy between procedures is not established. The purpose of this study is to present our initial experience with a "bridging" protocol for staged CAS-CTS.

METHODS

A retrospective review of staged CAS-CTS procedures at a single referral center was performed. All patients had multivessel coronary and/or valvular disease and severe carotid stenosis (>70%). Patients not previously on aspirin were also started on aspirin prior to surgery, followed by eptifibatide during CAS (intraprocedural bolus followed by post-procedural infusion which was continued until the morning of surgery). Pre- and perioperative (30 days) neurologic morbidity and mortality was the primary endpoint.

RESULTS

11 CAS procedures were performed in 10 patients using the protocol. The median duration of eptifibatide bridge therapy was 36 h (range 24-288 h). There was one minor bleeding complication (1/11, 9.1%) and no major bleeding complications during the bridging and post-operative period. There was one post-operative, non-neurologic death and zero perioperative ischemic strokes.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients undergoing staged CAS-CTS, Eptifibatide bridging therapy is a viable temporary antiplatelet strategy with a favorable safety profile. This strategy enables a flexible range of time-intervals between procedures.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the treatment strategies for coronary artery bypass graft patients with concomitant carotid artery atherosclerotic disease

OBJECTIVE

Stroke is one of the devastating complications after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). Underlying carotid artery atherosclerotic disease is reported to be an independent risk factor. The optimal treatment strategy for these patients remains under debate.

METHODS

We aimed to perform a network meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of additional carotid interventions for patients with concomitant carotid artery atherosclerotic disease who require CABG by comparing perioperative adverse event rates. All articles through February 2022 were searched using MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify studies that investigated outcomes of CABG only as well as additional staged vs combined carotid interventions by both carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS).

RESULTS

Two randomized controlled trials and 23 observational studies were included, yielding a total of 32,473 patients who underwent combined CEA and CABG (n = 20,204), CEA and staged CABG (n = 6882), CABG and staged CEA (n = 340), CAS and CABG regardless of timing and sequences (n = 1224), and CABG only (n = 3823). No strategy showed a significant advantage over CABG only in all perioperative outcomes. CEA and staged CABG was associated with the lowest perioperative stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) rate, significantly lower compared with CAS and CABG (odds ratio [OR], 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-0.76) as well as CABG and staged CEA (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.23-0.74), but was also associated with the highest perioperative mortality (OR, 2.50; 95% CI, 1.67-3.85, vs CAS and CABG) and myocardial infarction rate (OR, 3.70 [95% CI, 1.16-12.5] and OR, 2.50 [95% CI, 1.35-4.55] vs CAS and CABG, vs combined CEA and CABG, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

CEA and staged CABG are associated with low perioperative stroke/transient ischemic attack rates with a tradeoff of higher mortality and myocardial infarction rate. No strategy showed a significant advantage over the CABG-only strategy in all perioperative outcomes, outlining the importance of a tailored approach and determining proper indications for carotid intervention in these patients.

Operative and long-term outcomes of combined and staged carotid endarterectomy and coronary bypass

OBJECTIVE

Optimal temporal surgical management of significant carotid stenosis and coronary artery disease remains unknown. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and coronary artery bypass (CABG) are performed concurrently (CCAB) or in a staged (CEA-CABG or CABG-CEA) approach. Using the Vascular Quality Initiative-Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Coordinated Registry Network-Medicare-linked dataset, this study compared operative and long-term outcomes after CCAB and staged approaches.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative-Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Coordinated Registry Network dataset was used to identify CEAs from 2011 to 2018 with combined CABG or CABG within 45 days preceding or after CEA. Patients were stratified based on concurrent or staged approach. Primary outcomes were stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), all-cause mortality, stroke and death as composite (SD) and all as composite within 30 days from the last procedure as well as in the long term. Univariate analysis and risk-adjusted analysis using inverse propensity weighting were performed. Kaplan-Meier curves of stroke, MI, and death were created and compared.

RESULTS

There were 1058 patients included: 643 CCAB and 415 staged (309 CEA-CABG and 106 CABG-CEA). Compared with staged patients, those undergoing CCAB had a higher preoperative rate of congestive heart failure (24.8% vs 18.4%; P = .01) and decreased renal function (14.9% vs 8.5%; P < .01), as well as fewer prior neurological events (23.5% vs 31.4%; P < .01). Patients undergoing CCAB had similar weighted rate of 30-day stroke (4.6% vs 4.1%; P = .72), death (7.0% vs 5.0%; P = .32), and composite outcomes (stroke and death, 9.8% vs 8.5%; P = .56; stroke, death, and MI, 14.7% vs 17.4%; P = .31), but a lower weighted rate of MI (5.5% vs 11.5%; P < .01) vs the staged cohort. Long-term adjusted risks of stroke (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-1.36; P = .51) and mortality (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.76-1.36; P=.91) were similar between groups, but higher risk of MI long-term was seen in those staged (HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.07-2.08; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing CCAB or staged open revascularization for carotid stenosis and coronary artery disease, the staged approach had an increased risk of postoperative cardiac event, but the short- and long-term rates of stroke and mortality seem to be comparable. Adverse cardiovascular event risk is high between operations when staged and should be a consideration when selecting an approach. Although factors leading to staged sequencing performance need further clarity, CCAB seems to be safe and should be considered an equally reasonable option.

Prediction of stroke reconvalescence after coronary bypass surgery indicated by CT scan parameters

BACKGROUND

Stroke in the postoperative time course after heart surgery remains a serious risk. Cranial computer tomography (CCT) is the first line option to detect severe intracranial damage. However, only few data are available to predict neurological outcome. Using visual rating scales (VRSs), this study addresses reliability and effectivity to indicate neurological status and likelyhood of improvement.

METHODS

In a single-center retrospective evaluation, 3719 patients underwent coronary bypass surgery. Because of a delayed recovery phase and neurologic deficits after cardiac surgery 109 patients had a cranial CT scan in the early postoperative period. The incidence of clinically relevant findings within the imaging was rated by an experienced neuroradiologist using two VRS, that is, the age-related white matter changes (ARWMCs) and the Mendes-Ribeiro visual rating scale (MRVRS). Both are computer-assisted measurement schemes to detect stroke-related intracranial damage. Follow-up was investigated with regard to clinical outcome and patient-related risk profiles.

RESULTS

Of 109 patients with postoperative cranial CT scans due to prolonged recovery phases or proven neurological damage 44.5% had one cerebral defect in CCT imaging scans only. The others showed multiple defects. During hospital stay, 92.3% experienced neurological improvement exposing reduced ARWMC, while 7.1% had no improvement and correlating high scores. Of both scales, the ARWMC-VRS demonstrated superior accuracy and discrimination. The preoperative ejection fraction (EF), arteriosclerotic degeneration of carotid arteries, and reduced glomerular filtration rate were found to have a high correlation (r = 0.0005) with the latter group. In-hospital mortality of this cohort was 8.18%.

CONCLUSION

Both the ARWMC and MRVRS were found to be appropriate. They reliably discriminate the groups of stroke patients after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)  in the analysis of CCT images. When applied at the onset of neurological symptoms both scales are able to predict neurological reconvalescence upon hospital dismission. The ARWMC scale appeared superior as it demonstrated better accuracy and discrimination. The use of both VRS in patients with suspected stroke after CABG surgery can give insightful information toward a progression of neurological dysfunction or postoperative improvement.

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.

Survival and Prognostic Factors After Carotid Artery Stenting in Patients with Concomitant Coronary Disease

AIM: The aim of the study was to analyze the prognostic factors in patients after carotid artery stenting (CAS). METHODS: In 329 patients after CAS, the median survival (MS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated for a follow-up period of 2–101 months. All patients underwent coronary angiography before carotid stenting and, if indicated, coronary revascularization. Four groups of factors were analyzed: Carotid disease, coronary artery disease (CAD), underlying cardiac pathology, and concomitant diseases. RESULTS: MS in all patients was 86 months, OS at 1, 3, 5, and 9 years was - 94%, 85%, 73%, and 51%, respectively. Event free survival was 85 months. Log Rank-Mantel-Cox analysis demonstrated significantly reduced MS in 21 tested factors, most of them related to CAD. Two-step multifactorial Cox regression analysis defined only 7 of them as independent prognostic factors for the survival of patients after CAS: Left main stenosis, complete revascularization, late myocardial infarction, stroke, age over 70 years, valvular disease, and carotid score. CONCLUSION: Survival of patients after CAS is limited mainly by CAD and underlying cardiac pathology. Staged revascularization treatment strategy may improve the prognosis and survival of patients with both carotid and coronary disease.

A Systematic Review Supporting the Society for Vascular Surgery Guidelines on the Management of Carotid Artery Disease

BACKGROUND

To support the development of guidelines on the management of carotid disease, a writing committee from the Society for Vascular Surgery has commissioned this systematic review.

METHODS

We searched multiple data bases for studies addressing 5 questions: medical management vs. carotid revascularization (CEA) in asymptomatic patients, CEA vs. CAS in symptomatic low surgical risk patients, the optimal timing of revascularization after acute stroke, screening high risk patients for carotid disease, and the optimal sequence of interventions in patients with combined coronary and carotid disease. Studies were selected and appraised by pairs of independent reviewers. Meta-analyses were performed when feasible.

RESULTS

Medical management compared to carotid interventions in asymptomatic patients was associated with better early outcome during the first 30 days. However, CEA was associated with significantly lower long-term rate of stroke/death at 5 years. In symptomatic low risk surgical patients, CEA was associated with lower risk of stroke, but a significant increase in MI compared to CAS during the first 30 days. When the long-term outcome of transfemoral CAS vs. CEA in symptomatic patients were examined using pre-planned pooled analysis of individual patient data from four randomized trials, the risk of death or stroke within 120 days of the index procedure was 5.5% for CEA and 8.7% for CAS, which lends support that over the long-term, CEA has superior outcome than transfemoral CAS. When managing acute stroke, the comparison of CEA during the first 48 hours to that between day 2 and day14 did not reveal a statistically significant difference on outcomes during the first 30 days. Registry data show good results with CEA performed in the first week, but not within the first 48 hours. A single risk factor, aside from PAD, was associated with low carotid screening yield. Multiple risk factors greatly increase the yield of screening. Evidence on the timing of interventions in patients with combined carotid and coronary disease was sparse and imprecise. Patients without carotid symptoms, who had the carotid intervention first, compared to a combined carotid intervention and CABG, had better outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This updated evidence summary will support the SVS clinical practice guidelines for commonly raised clinical scenarios. CEA was superior to medical therapy in long-term prevention of stroke/death over medical therapy. CEA was also superior to transfemoral CAS in minimizing long-term stroke/death for symptomatic low risk surgical patients. CEA should optimally be performed between 2-14 days from the onset of acute stroke. Having multiple risk factors increases the value of carotid screening.

SOCIETY FOR VASCULAR SURGERY CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES FOR MANAGEMENT OF EXTRACRANIAL CEREBROVASCULAR DISEASE

Management of carotid bifurcation stenosis in stroke prevention has been the subject of extensive investigations, including multiple randomized controlled trials. The proper treatment of patients with carotid bifurcation disease is of major interest to vascular surgeons and other vascular specialists. In 2011, the Society for Vascular Surgery published guidelines for treatment of carotid artery disease. At the time, several randomized trials, comparing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS), were published. Since that publication, several studies and a few systematic reviews comparing CEA and CAS have been published, and the role of medical management has been re-emphasized. The current publication updates and expands the 2011 guidelines with specific emphasis on five areas: is carotid endarterectomy recommended over maximal medical therapy in low risk patients; is carotid endarterectomy recommended over trans-femoral carotid artery stenting in low surgical risk patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis of >50%; timing of carotid Intervention in patients presenting with acute stroke; screening for carotid artery stenosis in asymptomatic patients; and optimal sequence for intervention in patients with combined carotid and coronary artery disease. A separate implementation document will address other important clinical issues in extracranial cerebrovascular disease. Recommendations are made using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach, as has been done with other Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines. The committee recommends CEA as the first-line treatment for symptomatic low risk surgical patients with stenosis of 50% to 99% and asymptomatic patients with stenosis of 70% to 99%. The perioperative risk of stroke and death in asymptomatic patients must be <3% to ensure benefit for the patient. In patients with recent stable stroke (modified Rankin 0-2), carotid revascularization is considered appropriate in symptomatic patients with greater than 50% stenosis and is recommended and performed as soon as the patient is neurologically stable after 48 hours but definitely before 14 days of onset of symptoms. In the general population, screening for clinically asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis in patients without cerebrovascular symptoms or significant risk factors for carotid artery disease is not recommended. In selected asymptomatic patients who are at increased risk for carotid stenosis, we suggest screening for clinically asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis as long as the patients would potentially be fit for and willing to consider carotid intervention if significant stenosis is discovered. In patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis 50-99%, who require both CEA and CABG, we suggest CEA before or concomitant with CABG to potentially reduce the risk of stroke and stroke/death. The sequencing of the intervention depends on clinical presentation and institutional experience.

Safety of different carotid artery revascularization strategies in the coronary artery bypass graft population: study protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Concomitant significant carotid artery occlusive diseases (CAOD) increase the risk of perioperative stroke and death in patients who undergo coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). Although several surgical strategies can be used in the management of such patients, controversy still surrounds which is the best option for CABG patients with accompanying CAOD.

METHODS

Literature searches will be conducted covering articles published in PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Embase between January 1989 and December 2019. Search results will be limited to articles published in English. Six surgical strategies using carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) with different timings (i.e., before, after, or combined with CABG) will be evaluated. Randomized controlled trials and non-randomized studies comparing these strategies will be included. The quality of studies will be critically appraised using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool or ROBINS-I tool. Since CEA and CAS have comparable effectiveness for the treatment of significant CAOD, we will integrate direct and indirect evidence using network meta-analysis (NMA) to create hierarchies of the six surgical strategies based on their perioperative safety. The primary outcomes will be the probability of perioperative stroke and the probability of perioperative death. Additionally, we will analyze the probability of perioperative myocardial infarction (MI) as a secondary outcome. Pairwise meta-analyses and Bayesian network meta-analyses will be performed for all related outcome measures. Subgroup analyses, sensitivity analyses, and network meta-regression will be conducted to assess the robustness of the findings.

DISCUSSION

This NMA will summarize the direct and indirect evidence of perioperative safety with the aim of providing a ranking of the various surgical strategies. The results of this meta-analysis will provide useful information on optimal surgical management of CABG patients with concomitant significant CAOD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42020162611.

Asymptomatic carotid intraplaque hemorrhage is associated with a high risk of cerebral infarction and death after cardiovascular surgery

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of information on the natural history of asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (AsymCS) associated with cardiovascular diseases that require surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate risk factors for postoperative ipsilateral ischemic stroke and all-cause mortality after cardiovascular surgery in patients with AsymCS.

METHODS

Among 2158 patients who underwent cardiovascular surgery, 150 patients with AsymCS who didn't undergo carotid revascularization were included. The relationships between preoperative factors, including carotid intraplaque hemorrhage (IPH), and postoperative ipsilateral ischemic stroke and all-cause mortality were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

During the median follow-up of 1087 days of 150 patients with 19 IPH, 12 (8.0%) and 21 (14.0%) encountered ipsilateral infarction and all-cause mortality, respectively. Multivariable Cox regression analyses indicated that IPH was significantly predictive of both ipsilateral infarction (hazard ratio [HR] 21.31, 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.98-91.17; P ≤.001) and all-cause mortality (HR 4.64, 95% CI, 1.61-13.34; P = .004). Another significant factor was peak systolic velocity for ipsilateral infarction with the cutoff velocity of 227 cm/s by the receiver-operating characteristic curve.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort of patients with AsymCS undergoing cardiovascular surgery, IPH had a close connection with a high risk of both postoperative ischemic stroke and mortality after cardiovascular surgery.

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.

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.

Prevalence of carotid artery stenosis in ischaemic heart disease patients in Bangladesh

Background:

Concurrent carotid artery stenosis and ischaemic heart disease rates are increasing day by day in Bangladesh. Moreover, carotid artery stenosis has been identified as a high-risk factor for postoperative ischaemic cerebral inconvenience following coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

Methods:

This observational cross-sectional study was performed to evaluate 200 study patients from July 2017 to June 2018. Patients with coronary artery disease scheduled for isolated elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery were included in the study, excluding those with coexisting valvular or congenital heart disease and emergency coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

Results:

About two-thirds of the study patients were 50–59 years old, with a mean age of 57.7 ± 3.06 years. Approximately 70% patients were male; the male:female ratio was 2.1:1. Most of the patients (74.5%) were Muslim. The majority of patients (59.0%) were overweight, and severe carotid artery stenosis was significantly higher in obese patients (p ⩽ 0.05). Furthermore, hypertension and diabetes mellitus were significantly associated with moderate to severe carotid artery stenosis (p ⩽ 0.05). Multi-vessel coronary artery disease was significantly associated with the severity of carotid artery stenosis. Bilateral carotid artery stenosis was significantly associated with the severity of carotid artery stenosis (p ⩽ 0.05).

Conclusion:

Routine duplex screening will identify significant carotid artery disease and will subsequently reduce the risk of perioperative stroke in ischaemic heart disease patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

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.

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.

Open Heart Surgery Does Not Increase the Incidence of Ipsilateral Ischemic Stroke in Patients with Asymptomatic Severe Carotid Stenosis

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

We evaluated the incidence of perioperative stroke following the institution's 2007 practice change of discontinuing combined carotid endarterectomy and open heart surgery (OHS) for patients with severe carotid stenosis.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, we compared 113 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting, aortic valve replacement, or both from 2007 to 2011 with data collected from 2001 to 2006 from a similar group of patients. Our aim was to assess whether the practice change led to a greater incidence of stroke.

RESULTS

A total of 7350 consecutive patients undergoing OHS during the specified time period were screened. Of these, 3030 had OHS between 2007 and 2011 but none were combined with carotid artery surgery (new cohort). The remaining 4320 had OHS before 2007 and 44 had combined procedures (old cohort). Of patients undergoing OHS during the 10-year period of observation, 230 had severe (>80%) carotid stenosis. In the old cohort (before 2007), carotid stenosis was associated with perioperative stroke in 2.5% of cases. None of the 113 patients having cardiac procedures after 2007 received combined carotid artery surgery; only 1 of these patients harboring severe carotid stenosis had an ischemic stroke (.9%) during the perioperative period. The difference in stroke incidence between the 2 cohorts was statistically significant (P = .002).

CONCLUSION

The incidence of stroke in patients with severe carotid artery stenosis undergoing OHS was lower after combined surgery was discontinued. Combined carotid and OHS itself seems to be an important risk factor for stroke.

Perioperative strokes after coronary artery bypass grafting with staged carotid endarterectomy: A nationwide perspective

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To examine the risk of perioperative stroke on in-hospital morbidity and mortality in staged coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) procedures.

DESIGN

The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database was used to extract data on all patients who underwent staged CABG CEA procedures. They were identified using the ICD-9 (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision-Clinical Modification) diagnosis and procedure codes.

SETTING

Multi-institutional.

PATIENTS

Patients who underwent staged CABG and CEA from 1999 to 2011.

INTERVENTIONS

Staged CABG and CEA procedures.

MEASUREMENTS

Various pre-operative, and perioperative risk factors and their association with in-hospital mortality and morbidity were studied.

MAIN RESULTS

The study cohort was grouped into 2761 patients who underwent staged CEA and CABG. The average age of the patient population was 69years. An in-hospital mortality of 4.96% (137) was observed. Staged procedures showed a morbidity rate of 69.21%. Patients with perioperative strokes had a mortality rate of 16.73% following staged procedures. Other notable risk factors for mortality and morbidity were post-operative myocardial infarction (MI) and congestive heart failure (CHF).

CONCLUSION

Analysis of 2761 patients over a period of 12years (1999-2011) indicate perioperative stroke to be a strong post-operative predicator of in-hospital mortality and morbidity for staged procedures. Other significant factors such as advancing age, female gender and comorbidities like CHF, left ventricular dysfunction (LVD) and post-operative MI should also be considered when determining patient risk. Further investigative studies on staged CABG and CEA procedures are needed for better patient selection and for implementing preventative strategies such as neuroprotective medication and neuromonitoring to minimize the risk of ischemic strokes.

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.

Multisite artery disease: a common and challenging clinical condition calling for specific management

'Multisite' artery disease is defined as the simultaneous presence of clinically significant atherosclerotic lesions in at least two major vascular territories. The management of patients with multisite artery disease represents a common challenge in clinical practice, since they are at increased risk for both vascular and coronary surgery. Preliminary experiences suggest that percutaneous treatment may represent a promising strategy for patients with multisite artery disease. In this review, the prevalence and management of multisite artery disease are discussed with particular attention to coronary and peripheral revascularization related issues.

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.

Neurological complications of cardiac surgery

As increasing numbers of elderly people undergo cardiac surgery, neurologists are frequently called upon to assess patients with neurological complications from the procedure. Some complications mandate acute intervention, whereas others need longer term observation and management. A large amount of published literature exists about these complications and guidance on best practice is constantly changing. Similarly, despite technological advances in surgical intervention and modifications in surgical technique to make cardiac procedures safer, these advances often create new avenues for neurological injury. Accordingly, rapid and precise neurological assessment and therapeutic intervention rests on a solid understanding of the evidence base and procedural variables.

Should patients with asymptomatic significant carotid stenosis undergo simultaneous carotid and cardiac surgery?

A best evidence topic in cardiovascular surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether patients with severe asymptomatic carotid and coronary artery diseases should undergo simultaneous carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). A total of 624 papers were found using the reported search, of which 20 represent the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The author, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes, results and study results of these papers are tabulated. Previous cohort studies showed mixed results, while advocating for the necessity of a randomized controlled trial (RCT). A recent RCT showed that patients undergoing prophylactic or simultaneous CEA + CABG had lower rates of stroke (0%) compared with delayed CEA 1-3 months after CABG (7.7%), without significant perioperative mortality difference. This study included patients with unilateral severe (>70%) asymptomatic carotid stenosis requiring CABG. An earlier partly randomized trial also showed better outcomes for patients undergoing simultaneous procedures (P = 0.045). Interestingly, systematic reviews previously failed to show compelling evidence supporting prophylactic CEA. This could be partly due to the fact that these reviews collectively analyse different cohort qualities. Neurological studies have, however, shown reduced cognitive and phonetic quality and function in patients with unilateral and bilateral asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. Twenty-one RCTs comparing lone carotid artery stenting (CAS) and CEA informed the American Heart Association guidelines, which declared CAS comparable with CEA for symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid stenosis (CS). However, the risk of death/stroke for CAS alone is double that for CEA alone in the acute phase following onset of symptoms, while CEA alone is associated with a doubled risk of myocardial infarction. There is, however, no significant difference for combined 30-day risk of death/stroke/myocardial infarction. Outcomes of hybrid or simultaneous CAS/CABG procedures show comparable results, albeit from rather small cohorts. While current evidence leans towards simultaneous CEA/CABG, the emergence of hybrid operating theatres in various institutions may allow larger cohorts with subsequent significant data on simultaneous CAS/CABG. A randomized controlled trial comparing both approaches would be crucial in informing future updates of existing guidelines.

Influence of carotid injury in post-myocardial revascularization surgery and its late evolution

BACKGROUND

Approximately 30% of perioperative CVA of myocardial revascularization surgery (MRS) are a result of carotid injuries, without reduction of risk confirmed by perioperative intervention.

OBJECTIVES

Evaluate the impact of carotid disease and perioperative intervention in patients subjected to MRS.

METHODS

Observational, retrospective study, evaluating 1169 patients aged > 69 years undergoing MRS from January, 2006 and December, 2010, monitored, on average, for 49 months. All patients were subjected to ultrasonography of carotids before MRS. It was defined as carotid disease when lesion > 50%. The primary outcome was composed of CVA incidence, transitory ischemic accident (TIA) and death due CVA.

RESULTS

Prevalence of carotid disease was of 19.9% of patients. The incidence of primary outcome between unhealthy and healthy patients was of 6.5% and 3.7%, respectively (p = 0.0018). In the first 30 days, there were 18.2% of events. Were related to carotid disease: renal dysfunction (OR 2.03, IC95% 1.34-3.07; p < 0.01), peripheral arterial disease (OR 1.80, IC95% 1.22-2.65; p < 0.01) and previous myocardial infarction (OR 0.47, IC95% 0.35-0.65; p < 0.01). Regarding the primary outcome, were associated the previous TIA (OR 5.66, IC95% 1.67-6.35; p < 0.01) and renal dysfunction (OR 3.28, IC95% 1.67-6.45; p < 0.01). In patients with lesion >70%, perioperative carotid intervention demonstrated an incidence of 16% in primary outcome compared to 4.3% in conservatory treatment (p = 0.056) with no difference between percutaneous and surgical approaches (p = 0.516).

CONCLUSION

Carotid disease increases the risk of CVA, TIA or death due to CVA in MRS. However, the carotid intervention was not related to reduction of primary outcome.

Carotid Artery Stenosis Associated with Increased Mortality in Patients who Underwent Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Single Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Vascular disease resulting from arteriosclerosis is a severe worldwide health risk. Early diagnosis and intervention is important to control adverse cerebral and cardiovascular events. The aim of this study was to assess the potential predictors of mortality in patients submitted to coronary bypass surgery.

METHODS

Cohort study included asymptomatic cerebrovascular disease patients scheduled for coronary artery bypass grafting admitted to the cardiology reference center. All patients were submitted to carotid artery ultrasound assessment prior to surgery and were followed up during the entire in-hospital postoperative period. Carotid artery stenosis was considered clinically significant when cross sectional area ≥50%. Significance was set at p <0.05. Logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of mortality.

RESULTS

Of 455 patients with a mean age of 62.2 years 65.6% were males. The prevalence of carotid artery stenosis was 18.7%. It was absent in 3.6% of the patients, below 50% in 77.8%, between 50 and 69% in 11.6%, and between 70 and 99% in 6.9%. The carotid artery was occluded in 0.2% of the sample. An overall mortality of 12%, affecting 35 men (P=0.001) with stenosis ≥50%. After logistic regression analysis, carotid artery stenosis ≥50% was confirmed as being an independent predictor of mortality (P=0.005).

CONCLUSION

In this series carotid artery stenosis showed a high prevalence in the sample assessed and was an independent predictor of mortality.

Coronary and carotid atherosclerosis: similarities and differences

Although a relationship is commonly accepted between coronary and carotid arterial disease, suggesting that atherosclerosis is a systemic condition, the extent of this association and correspondence has not been fully elucidated. This review discusses recent research in this field and highlights areas for future study. The prevalence of severe carotid stenosis increases with prevalence of coronary stenosis, with the latter being found in a significant number of stroke patients, while those with carotid stenosis may be at higher risk of myocardial infarction than stroke. There also appear to be common risk factors (age, diabetes, hypertension, smoking and dyslipidemia), although the effects in both vascular systems may not be identical. Furthermore, while the degree of stenosis in the coronary artery has little ability to predict acute coronary syndrome, which is caused by local thrombosis from a ruptured or eroded plaque, severe carotid stenosis causing hypoperfusion is highly predictive of stroke, although this effect may be time-limited. This apparent difference in event mechanism in the two arteries is interesting as is the difference in the rate of development of collaterals. Overall, the evidence shows that a clear relationship exists between disease in the coronary and carotid arteries, since conventional risk factors and the extent of stenosis and/or previous events emanating from one artery have a strong bearing on the prevalence of events in the other artery. Nevertheless, the exact correspondence between the two arteries is unclear, with sometimes contradictory study results. More research is needed to identify the full extent of risk factors for severe stenosis and cardio- or cerebral vascular events, among which, inflammatory biomarkers such as hs-CRP and prior vascular events are likely to play a key role.