A systematic review of outcomes following staged and synchronous carotid endarterectomy and coronary artery 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 noninferior to indiscriminate screening. Efficacy comparisons are made between revascularization strategies such as staged versus synchronous CEA/CABG, CAS, and hybrid 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.

Perioperative and Long-Term Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Synchronous Carotid Endarterectomy and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Single-Center Experience

INTRODUCTION

Patients requiring coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can be managed with staged (CEA before CABG), reverse staged (CABG before CEA) or synchronous treatment. This single-center retrospective study evaluated the outcomes in patients undergoing planned synchronous CEA and CABG.

METHODS

Between 2000 and 2020 a total of 185 patients with symptomatic triple-vessel or left main coronary artery disease associated with 70-99% asymptomatic or 50-99% symptomatic uni- or bilateral internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis underwent synchronous CEA and CABG at our institution. Study endpoints were defined as mortality, stroke and myocardial infarction at 30 days. Additionally, the composite endpoint of these events was investigated.

RESULTS

At 30 days, mortality, stroke and myocardial infarction rates were 5.9%, 8.1% (permanent [unresolved deficit at discharge] 5.4%) and 3.8%, respectively, and the composite endpoint was reached in 13.0% of patients. Patients suffering from a stroke more frequently had a contralateral 70-99% ICA stenosis (60.0% vs. 17.3%; p < 0.001), peripheral artery disease (73.3% vs. 38.9%; p = 0.013) and prolonged cardiopulmonary bypass time (mean 119 ± 62 min vs. 84 ± 29 min; p = 0.012). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed the duration of cardiopulmonary bypass (odds ratio [OR] 1.024; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.002-1.046; p = 0.034), a history of type 2 diabetes mellitus (OR 5.097; 95% CI 1.161-22.367; p = 0.031) and peripheral artery disease (OR 5.814; 95% CI 1.231-27.457; p = 0.026) as independent risk factors for reaching the composite endpoint.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing synchronous CEA and CABG face an elevated risk of perioperative cardiovascular events, particularly an increased stroke risk in patients with symptomatic and bilateral ICA stenosis. Graphical Abstract available for this article.

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.

Stroke prevention strategies for cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Stroke is a much-feared complication of cardiac surgery, but existing literature on preventive strategies is fragmented. Hence, a systematic review and meta-analysis of stroke prevention strategies for cardiac surgery was conducted.

METHODS

An electronic literature search was conducted to retrieve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating perioperative interventions for cardiac surgery, with stroke as an outcome. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to generate risk ratios (RRs), 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), and forest plots. Descriptive analysis and synthesis of literature was conducted for interventions not amenable to meta-analysis, focusing on risks of stroke, myocardial infarction and study-defined major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).

RESULTS

Fifty-six RCTs (61 894 patients) were retrieved. Many included trials were underpowered to detect differences in stroke risk. Among pharmacological therapies, only preoperative amiodarone was shown to reduce stroke risk in one trial. Concomitant left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) significantly reduced stroke risk (RR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.36-0.84, P = 0.006) in patients with preoperative atrial fibrillation, and there was no difference in on-pump versus off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (RR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.64-1.37, P = 0.735). Much controversy exists in literature on the timing of carotid endarterectomy relative to CABG in patients with severe carotid stenosis. The use of preoperative remote ischemic preconditioning was not found to reduce rates of stroke or MACE.

CONCLUSION

This review presents a comprehensive synthesis of existing interventions for stroke prevention in cardiac surgery, and identifies gaps in research which may benefit from future, large-scale RCTs. LAAC should be considered to reduce stroke incidence in patients with preoperative atrial fibrillation.

Endovascular carotid revascularization under open-chest extracorporeal circulation combined with cardiac surgery in unstable patients at increased risk of carotid-related stroke: SIMultaneous urgent cardiac surgery and MicroNet-covered stent carotid revascularization in extreme-risk patients-SIMGUARD Study

BACKGROUND

In patients at urgent need for cardiac surgery coexisting with increased-stroke-risk carotid stenosis, any staged intervention increases the risk of complications from the primarily unaddressed pathology. In this challenging cohort, we assessed safety and feasibility of endovascular carotid revascularization under open-chest extracorporeal circulation (ECC) combined with cardiac surgery (hybrid-room true simultaneous treatment).

METHODS

Per-protocol (PP), after general anesthesia induction, chest-opening and ECC stand-by installation, carotid stenting (CAS) was performed (femoral/radial or direct carotid access) with ad-hoc/on-hand switch to ECC cardiac surgery.

RESULTS

Over 78 months, 60 patients (70.7±6.9years, 85% male, all American Society of Anesthesiology grade IV) were enrolled. All were at increased carotid-related stroke risk (ipsilateral recent stroke/transient ischemick attack, asymptomatic cerebral infarct, increased-risk lesion morphology, bilateral severe stenosis). Majority of study procedures involved CAS+coronary bypass surgery or CAS+valve replacement±coronary bypass. 45 (75%) patients were PP- and 15 (25%) not-PP (NPP-) managed (context therapy). CAS was 100% neuroprotected (transient flow reversal-64.4%, filters-35.6%) and employed micronet-covered plaque-sequestrating stents with routine post-dilatation optimization/embedding. 4 deaths (6.7%) and 7 strokes (11.7%) occurred by 30-days. Despite CAS+surgery performed on aspirin and unfractionated heparin-only (delayed clopidogrel-loading), no thrombosis occurred in the stented arteries, and 30-days stent patency was 100%. NPP-management significantly increased the risk of death/ipsilateral stroke (OR 38.5; P<0.001) and death/any stroke (OR 12.3; P=0.002) by 30-days.

CONCLUSIONS

In cardiac unstable patients at increased carotid-related stroke risk who require urgent cardiac surgery, simultaneous cardiac surgery and CAS with micronet-covered stent lesion sequestration is feasible and safe and shows efficacy in minimizing stroke risk. Larger-scale, multicentric evaluation is warranted. (SIMGUARD NCT04973579).

Heart surgery and simultaneous carotid endarterectomy - 10-years single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Patients with coronary artery heart disease frequently suffer concomitant carotid vascular disease and are at high perioperative risk for neurological adverse events. Several concepts regarding the timing and modality of carotid revascularization are controversially discussed in patients with heart disease. Current guidelines recommendations on myocardial revascularization recommend a concomitant carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with a history of stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) or 50-99% grade of the carotid stenosis. Our study aimed to analyze early outcome parameters of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), but also including concomitant heart valve surgery and simultaneous CEA.

METHODS

This study retrospectively analyzed a cohort of 111 patients from our institutional database undergoing heart surgery with CABG or heart-valve surgery between 2010 and 2020 with concomitant carotid surgery due to significant carotid stenosis.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing heart and simultaneous carotid surgery were 77 ± 8.0 years of age with a body mass index of 28 ± 1.7 kg/m2 and a mean EuroSCORE II of 6.5 ± 2.3. Most patients (61%) had a smoking history and arterial hypertension (97%). The preoperative mean grade of internal carotid stenosis was 87 ± 4.2%, 13% of patients suffered from internal carotid artery stenosis on both sites. In total, 4.5% of patients had previously undergone internal carotid artery intervention before and 6.3% had a history of stroke with a persistent neurologic disorder in 1.8%, 8.9% of cases had prior TIA. Thirty-day all-cause mortality was 6.3% and postoperative neurologic events occurred with 7.2% TIA and 4.5% of disabling stroke.

CONCLUSION

Within the reported patient population of coronary artery heart disease and significant internal carotid stenosis, a one-time approach with CABG or heart-valve surgery and CEA is safe and feasible as justified by clinical and neurological postoperative outcomes.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Outcomes of simultaneous carotid endarterectomy and coronary artery bypass grafting: A single centre experience

OBJECTIVE

Stroke following a coronary artery bypass surgery is a well-known complication often predisposed by carotid artery disease. Perioperative risk of stroke after on-pump cardiac surgery can overall affect 2% of patients. Patients with 80-99% unilateral carotid artery stenosis carry a 4% risk of stroke. Significant carotid artery stenosis is present in 3-10% of patients who are candidates for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Those patients might be considered for either simultaneous or staged carotid endarterectomy and CABG to reduce the risk of stroke and death. The purpose of this study was to evaluate preoperative and intraoperative risk factors for myocardial infarction (MI), stroke and death and assess complications occurring during the early postoperative period after simultaneous CABG/CAE procedure.

METHODS

A single centre retrospective analysis of 134 patients from 2015 to 2019 who underwent simultaneous CABG/CEA was performed. At the same period, a total of 2827 CABG were performed, of which 4.7% were simultaneous interventions. We excluded staged CEA/CABG procedures, off-pump CABG and urgent CABG patients. All patients included in the study met the criteria for elective CABG for triple-vessel or left main trunk symptomatic coronary artery disease (CAD) with asymptomatic >70% carotid stenosis or symptomatic ipsilateral >50% carotid stenosis regardless of the degree of contralateral carotid artery stenosis. Patient demographics, comorbidities and operative details were reviewed. The primary endpoint was to assess the intraoperative and 30-day risk of stroke and death after simultaneous CEA/CABG procedure.

RESULTS

Simultaneous CEA/CABG is effective procedure that can be performed in high-risk symptomatic patients with acceptable results. Predictors of postoperative stroke were smoking (P = 0.011), history of MI (P = 0.046), history of CABG (P = 0.013), and history of stroke/TIA (P = 0.005). Significant risk factors for adverse major postoperative complications after simultaneous CEA/CABG procedure were cardiac arrhythmia (AF or AFL) (P = 0.045), previous MI (P < 0.001), and smoking (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Synchronous CEA/CABG procedure can be performed with acceptable results in patients having a high risk of stroke, septuagenarians and older.

Major Adverse Cardiac and Cerebrovascular Events in Patients Undergoing Simultaneous Heart Surgery and Carotid Endarterectomy

BACKGROUND

Patients with simultaneous relevant internal carotid artery stenosis and coronary artery heart or valve disease represent a high-risk collective with respect to cerebral or cardiovascular severe events when undergoing surgery. There exist several concepts regarding the timing and modality of carotid revascularization, which are controversially discussed in patients with heart disease. More data regarding outcome predictors and measures are needed to gain a better understanding of the best treatment option of the discussed patient collective.

METHODS

This single-center study retrospectively analyzed n = 111 patients undergoing heart surgery with coronary artery bypass grafting or heart-valve surgery and concomitant carotid surgery due to significant internal carotid artery stenosis. In order to do so, patients were divided into two groups with respect to postoperative major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) with thirty-day all-cause mortality, valve related mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke and transitory ischemic attack.

RESULTS

Preoperative patient's characteristic in the no-MACCE and MACCE group were mainly balanced, other than higher rates of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, instable angina pectoris and prior transitory ischemic attack in the MACCE cohort. The analysis of intraoperative characteristics revealed a higher number of intra-aortic balloon pump implantation, which is in line for a higher number of postoperative supports. Besides MACCE, patients suffered significantly more often from postoperative bleeding events and re-thoracotomy, cardiopulmonary reanimation, new onset postoperative dialysis and prolonged intensive care unit stay related complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the reported patient population suffering from MACCE after a simultaneous carotid endarterectomy and heart surgery, a preoperative history of transitory ischemic attack and kidney disease might account for worse outcomes, as severe events were not only neurologically driven but also associated with postoperative cardiovascular complications following heart surgical procedures.

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.

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.

Strategy for endovascular treatment of a patient with combined coronary and carotid artery atherosclerosis: a case report

Treatment of patients with combined coronary and carotid artery atherosclerosis is a difficult task due to the increased risk of surgical intervention in this cohort of patients. Lack of timely treatment can lead to a decrease in the quality of life of patients, as well as to death. In some cases with combined coronary and carotid artery atherosclerosis, the choice of surgical intervention may depend on vascular bed involvement. In a case report, open surgery was associated with a very high risk of perioperative complications; so the only way of myocardial revascularization was minimally invasive endovascular surgery. The article presents a case of the treatment of a patient with a combined multivessel coronary and bilateral carotid artery atherosclerosis.

Long-term results after simultaneous carotid and coronary revascularisation

BACKGROUND

The revascularisation strategy for concomitant carotid and coronary disease is unknown. Simultaneous or stage coronary artery stenting and carotid endarterectomy are the most common revascularisation approach in the CABG population. This study aimed to evaluate long-term results after simultaneous carotid artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy in patients who underwent coronary artery bypass surgery.

METHODS

This is a prospective cohort non-randomised single-institution study. During the period from 2012 to 2015, sixty consecutive patients (65.9 ± 7.41 mean) underwent simultaneous carotid artery stenting and coronary artery bypass surgery (n = 30) or simultaneous carotid endarterectomy and coronary artery bypass surgery (n = 30). The primary endpoints were short- and long-term rates of adverse events (transient ischemic attack, stroke, myocardial infarction, and death). The mean follow-up was 62.05 ± 11.12 months.

RESULTS

In-hospital mortality was insignificantly higher in the carotid endarterectomy, and coronary artery bypass surgery group (6.6% vs. 0%), the rate of stroke and myocardial infarction was similar (13.3% and 0% in the carotid endarterectomy and coronary artery bypass surgery group vs. 6.6% and 3.3% in the carotid artery stenting and coronary artery bypass surgery group, respectively). The intensive care unit readmission was significantly higher in the surgical revascularisation approach; it was an independent predictor of hospital mortality. The overall mortality during the follow-up period was 14.28% in both groups. Freedom of the composite adverse outcomes (stroke, myocardial infarction, and death) was 78.55%.

CONCLUSION

Comparing two revascularisation strategies is not straightforward due to different anatomical indications for carotid artery stenting and endarterectomy. We consider that each technique has an essential role in carotid revascularisation. Good selection of patients, according to indications, contributes to satisfactory short- and long-term results.

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.

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.

A Case of Coexistence of Severe Coronary and Carotid Artery Stenosis Treated with Carotid Artery Stenting Using Intra-Aortic Balloon Pumping and a Temporary Pacemaker

The risk factors of carotid stenosis and coronary stenosis are similar, and therefore, certain patients with carotid stenosis may have coronary heart disease. Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) is the major therapy for ischemic heart disease with three-vessel and left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease. However, CABG can induce cerebral infarctions in cases with carotid stenosis. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) was used to be the standard therapy for carotid stenosis; however, CEA requires general anesthesia and has a high risk of cardiovascular events in patients with ischemic heart disease. In recent times, carotid artery stenting (CAS), which does not need general anesthesia, is the new strategy for carotid stenosis. However, CAS induces hypotension and bradycardia because of a carotid node reflex, which is dangerous in patients with ischemic heart disease. We reported a case of the coexistence of severe coronary stenosis including the LMCA and three vessels and carotid stenosis. CAS before CABG under local anesthesia was successful with the use of intra-aortic balloon pumping (IABP) and a temporary pacemaker.

Coexisting Coronary and Carotid Artery Disease - Which Technique and in Which Order? Case Report and Review of Literature

Coexisting carotid artery stenosis and coronary artery disease is common and there is currently no consensus in treatment guidelines on the timing, sequence and methods of revascularization. We report a case of a patient with symptomatic triple vessel coronary artery disease as well as asymptomatic severe right internal carotid artery stenosis. Our patient underwent myocardial revascularization first, because she presented with unstable angina and was asymptomatic neurologically. This article summarizes current literature about the approach to carotid and coronary artery revascularization and addresses the decision-making process regarding the timing and sequence of revascularization.

[Hybrid revascularization of the brain and myocardium: risk stratification for in-hospital complications]

AIM

The study was aimed at determining efficacy of a new computer program of stratification of the risk for postoperative adverse cardiovascular events in patients with atherosclerotic lesions of coronary and carotid arteries.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Based on a mathematical analysis of the outcomes of treatment of patients with atherosclerotic lesions of coronary and carotid arteries over the period from 2011 to 2015, we created a program making it possible to determine a staged or simultaneous policy of revascularization, which was retrospectively and prospectively tested in our medical facility.

RESULTS

Within the frameworks of a clinical example we carried out hybrid revascularization of the brain and myocardium in the scope of percutaneous coronary intervention and carotid endarterectomy. During the early postoperative hours, the development of myocardial infarction was registered. According to the program's calculations, in using other strategies of surgical treatment (carotid endarterectomy + coronary artery bypass grafting and carotid endarterectomy - coronary artery bypass grafting), the level of risk for the development of a complication was lowest. Thus, taking into consideration this risk stratification by a multidisciplinary team made it possible to avoid the development of complications.

CONCLUSION

This program of decision-making regarding revascularization for atherosclerotic lesions of coronary and carotid arteries may be an additional tool in the armamentarium of the methods of determining therapeutic strategy for this patient cohort.

Carotid endarterectomy versus conservative management of the asymptomatic carotid stenosis before coronary artery bypass grafting: a retrospective study

Background

Our retrospective single-center study aimed to evaluate the safety of the carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in comparison to patients with untreated asymptomatic carotid stenosis ≥60% before CABG.

Methods

This single-center retrospective study included 174 patients with asymptomatic unilateral carotid stenosis treated between 2004 and 2017 with CABG. Thereof 106 patients had CEA before cardiac surgery either by a simultaneous (n = 62) or staged (n = 44) approach. Patients with untreated carotid stenosis served as control (no-CEA group; n = 68).

Results

The mean stenosis grade was higher in the CEA group (CEA 83% (±1), no-CEA 71% (±1) p < 0.0001). The overall stroke rate was 5/174 (3%) and was due to a high incidence of stroke in the no-CEA group (CEA: 0/106 (0%); No-CEA 5/68 (7%) p = 0.0083). The overall mortality was 1% and comparable between the groups (CEA: 2/106 (2%); No-CEA 0/68 (0%) p = 0.5211). Stroke related mortality was not observed. The groups were similar regarding the incidence of myocardial infarction (p = 1.0), atrial fibrillation (p = 0.1931), delirium (p = 0.2106) and IMC/ICU stay (p = 0.1542). No significant difference in the subgroup analysis was found between the simultaneous and staged approach regarding the myocardial infarction (simultaneous: 1/62 (1%); staged: 1/44 (1%); p = 1.0).

Conclusions

CEA performed as a staged procedure in local anesthesia or a simultaneous procedure in general anesthesia, may reduce the stroke risk prior to CABG.

Synchronous versus staged carotid artery stenting and coronary artery bypass graft for patients with concomitant severe coronary and carotid artery stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery disease requiring coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) frequently coexists with critical carotid stenosis. The most optimized strategy for treating concomitant carotid and coronary artery disease remains debatable.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare synchronous CAS and CABG versus staged CAS and CABG for patients with concomitant coronary artery disease and carotid artery stenosis in terms of peri-operative (30-day) and long-term clinical outcomes.

METHODS

This study was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies were identified through a search of PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane database until December 2019. A meta-analysis was conducted with the use of a random effects model. The I-square statistic was used to assess heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Four studies comprising 357 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Patients who were treated with the synchronous approach had a statistically significant higher risk for peri-operative stoke (OR: 3.71; 95% CI: 1.00-13.69; I² = 0%) compared tο the staged group. Peri-operative mortality (OR: 4.50; 95% CI: 0.88-23.01; I² = 0%), myocardial infarction (MI) (OR: 1.54; 95% CI: 0.18- 13.09; I² = 0%), postoperative bleeding (OR: 0.27;95% CI: 0.02-3.12; I² = 0%), transient ischemic attacks (TIA) (OR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.04- 9.20; I² = 0.0%), acute kidney injury (AKI) (OR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.03-4.03; I² = 0.0%) and atrial fibrillation rates (OR:0.27; 95% CI: 0.02-3.12; I² = 0.0%) were similar between the two groups. Synchronous CAS-CABG and staged CAS followed by CABG were associated with similar rates of late mortality (OR: 3.75; 95% CI: 0.50-27.94; I² = 0.0%), MI (OR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.01-12.03; I² = 0.0%) and stroke (OR:3.58; 95% CI:0.84-15.20; I² = 0.0%) after a mean follow-up of 47 months.

CONCLUSION

The simultaneous approach was associated with an increased risk of 30-day stroke compared to staged CAS and CABG. However, no statistically significant difference was found in long-term results of mortality, MI and stroke between the two approaches. Future studies are warranted to validate our results.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Long non-coding RNA H19 regulates endothelial cell aging via inhibition of STAT3 signalling

Aims

Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) have been shown to regulate numerous processes in the human genome, but the function of these transcripts in vascular aging is largely unknown. We aim to characterize the expression of lncRNAs in endothelial aging and analyse the function of the highly conserved lncRNA H19.

Methods and results

H19 was downregulated in endothelium of aged mice. In human, atherosclerotic plaques H19 was mainly expressed by endothelial cells and H19 was significantly reduced in comparison to healthy carotid artery biopsies. Loss of H19 led to an upregulation of p16 and p21, reduced proliferation and increased senescence in vitro. Depletion of H19 in aortic rings of young mice inhibited sprouting capacity. We generated endothelial-specific inducible H19 deficient mice (H19iEC-KO), resulting in increased systolic blood pressure compared with control littermates (Ctrl). These H19iEC-KO and Ctrl mice were subjected to hindlimb ischaemia, which showed reduced capillary density in H19iEC-KO mice. Mechanistically, exon array analysis revealed an involvement of H19 in IL-6 signalling. Accordingly, intercellular adhesion molecule 1 and vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 were upregulated upon H19 depletion. A luciferase reporter screen for differential transcription factor activity revealed STAT3 as being induced upon H19 depletion and repressed after H19 overexpression. Furthermore, depletion of H19 increased the phosphorylation of STAT3 at TYR705 and pharmacological inhibition of STAT3 activation abolished the effects of H19 silencing on p21 and vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 expression as well as proliferation.

Conclusion

These data reveal a pivotal role for the lncRNA H19 in controlling endothelial cell aging.

Synchronous CEA and CABG in asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis: A case study

In the United States, there were 213,700 coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgeries and 102,700 carotid endarterectomies (CEA) in 2011. Combined CEA and CABG surgeries are lower than either CEA or CABG, with an estimated 1,370 surgeries in 2012. There is some literature which supports that the surgeries can be performed safely together (referred to as combined, synchronous, tandem, or concomitant procedures). The purpose of this article is to describe the merits and potential complications involved with undergoing synchronous carotid artery and coronary artery bypass procedures. This purpose will be addressed by examining a case study of a patient who completed a synchronous procedure and by also reviewing the literature which addresses the benefits versus the risks associated with the synchronous procedures. Some studies found an increased incidence of perioperative and postoperative risks such as stroke, myocardial infarction, and death with the combined procedures, whereas some studies found no difference in the risks when the operations were performed sequentially. Combined or synchronous coronary artery bypass and carotid artery endarterectomy may be a safe surgical option for a specific subset of patients.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

One-day, sequential carotid artery stenting followed by cardiac surgery in patients with severe carotid and cardiac disease

Optimal management of patients with internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis concurrent with severe cardiac disease remains undefined. The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and feasibility of the one-day, sequential approach by carotid artery stenting (CAS) immediately followed by cardiac surgery. The study included 70 consecutive patients with symptomatic > 50% or ⩾ 80% asymptomatic ICA stenosis coexisting with severe coronary/valve disease, who underwent one-day, sequential CAS + cardiac surgery. The majority of patients (85.7%) had CSS class III or IV angina and 10% had non-ST elevation myocardial infarction. The EuroSCORE II risk was 2.4% (IQR 1.69-3.19%). All CAS procedures were performed according to the 'tailored' algorithm with a substantial use of proximal neuroprotection devices of 44.3%. Closed-cell (75.7%) and mesh-covered (18.6%) stents were implanted in most cases. The majority of patients underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (88.6%) or isolated valve replacement (7.1%). No major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) occurred at the CAS stage. There were three (4.3%) perioperative MACCE: one myocardial infarction and two deaths. All MACCE were related to cardiac surgery and were due to the high surgical risk profile of the patients. Up to 30 days, no further MACCE were observed. No perioperative or 30-day neurological complications occurred. In this patient series, one-day, sequential CAS and cardiac surgery was relatively safe and did not result in neurological complications. Thus, a strategy of preoperative CAS could be considered for patients with severe or symptomatic ICA stenosis who require urgent cardiac surgery.

[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.

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.

[In-hospital outcomes of transcutaneous coronary intervention and carotid endarterectomy in hybrid and staged regimens]

The aim of this study was comparative assessment of in-hospital outcomes after hybrid and staged surgical management of patients presenting with haemodynamically significant lesions of the coronary (CA) and brachiocephalic arteries (BCA) treated by means of either endovascular or surgical techniques. Over the period from 2010 to 2017, we operated on a total of 197 patients with stenotic lesions of the carotid and coronary arteries. The strategy of revascularization included transcutaneous coronary intervention (TCI) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Of these, 73 (37%) patients underwent staged revascularization of the brain and myocardium in various sequence (TCI-CEA or CEA-TCI), with a mean interval between the operations amounting to 9.89±7.36 months. Unfavourable outcomes were regarded as the development of such significant cardiovascular events as myocardial infarction (MI), acute impairment of cerebral circulation, death, repeat unplanned revascularization. For hybrid strategy (TCI+CEA) the index period of assessing the outcomes was the single in-hospital period, whereas for the staged strategy it was the time period beginning from the in-hospital period of the primary operation and ending by the in-hospital period of the second stage. The groups were comparable by the absolute majority of the parameters. More than half of the patients were elderly males. One third had a history of MI. The findings of coronary angiography most often revealed lesions of 1-2 CAs. The average parameters of carotid artery stenosis, according to the BCA angiography varied from 74.9 to 82.6%, with bilateral occlusive stenotic lesions being revealed in every third patient. In connection with more frequent involvement of 1-2 CAs the patients underwent implantation of 1-2 stents. In our sample we used a total of 247 stents. Of these, 119 were uncoated and 128 were drug-eluting stents. No between-group significant differences in the development of unfavourable cardiovascular events during the in-hospital postoperative period were revealed. However, despite this, a pronounced negative tendency of the complication rate was noted in the group of staged revascularization. Non-optimal time intervals between the stages of the operations in a third of cases exceeded one year on the patient's own initiative. Nearly a quarter of patients did not come for the second stage of revascularization. An important finding of our study was no increase in the risk of stent thrombosis in hybrid operations compared with the staged approach, despite administration of a loading dose of clopidogrel after CEA, but not before TCI. Another significant result was the fact of greater availability of revascularization of the myocardium and the brain within the framework of the hybrid strategy as compared with the staged one, which may play an important role in prevention of ischaemic unfavourable events in the remote period of follow up.

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.

Risk and Outcome after Simultaneous Carotid Surgery and Cardiac Surgery: Single Centre Experience

OBJECTIVE

Carotid artery stenosis in patients undergoing open-heart surgery may increase risk and deteriorate outcome. The aim of the study was the analysis of risks and outcome after simultaneous carotid and cardiac surgery.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 100 consecutive patients who underwent simultaneous carotid surgery and open-heart surgery during a 5-year period (from 2006 to 2010). Seventy patients were male and 30 female; the mean age was 70.9±7.9 years (median: 71.8 years). Seventy-three patients underwent coronary bypass grafting (CABG), 18 patients combined CABG and valve procedures, 7 patients CABG combined with other procedures, and 3 patients isolated valve surgery. More than half of patients had had bilateral carotid artery pathology (n=51) including contralateral carotid artery occlusion in 12 cases.

RESULTS

Carotid artery patch plasty was performed in 71 patients and eversion technique in 29. In 75 cases an intraluminal shunt was used. Thirty-day mortality rate was 7% due to cardiac complications (n=5), metabolic disturbance (n=1), and diffuse cerebral embolism (n=1). There were no carotid surgery-related deaths. Postoperatively, transient cerebral ischemia occurred in one patient and stroke with mild permanent neurological deficit (Rankin level 2) in another patient.

CONCLUSION

Simultaneous carotid artery surgery and open-heart surgery have low risk. The underlying cardiac disease influences outcome.

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.

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

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

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