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

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.

Evaluation of Staged TCAR and Cardiac Surgery or Structural Heart Intervention

INTRODUCTION

The optimal treatment strategy for patients with concomitant carotid and cardiac disease remains controversial. Transcarotid artery revascularization stenting with reversed flow protection (TCAR) has achieved results equivalent to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in high risk patients.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients at a single center who received staged TCAR prior to cardiac intervention was performed.

RESULTS

37 patients underwent 42 TCAR procedures prior to cardiac intervention (25 requiring open cardiac surgery and 12 requiring percutaneous intervention). There were no myocardial or neurological complications following TCAR prior to cardiac intervention. Three patients (8%) developed a neck hematoma which required evacuation.

CONCLUSION

A staged approach to combined carotid and cardiac pathology with TCAR prior to cardiac intervention appears to be a safe and effective strategy.

To drain or not to drain following carotid endarterectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

A postoperative neck hematoma can be a life-threatening complication after carotid endarterectomy necessitating urgent surgical decompression to avoid airway compromise. The practice of routine incisional drain placement is variable with few published studies evaluating the "to drain versus not to drain" approach. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the safety and efficacy of neck drain placement for prevention of neck hematoma requiring re-exploration for decompression.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for the outcome of surgical re-exploration for neck decompression among patients receiving or not receiving wound drainage.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

We identified 5 studies for inclusion, comprising 48,297 patients with 19,832 (41.1%) patients receiving a drain after carotid endarterectomy. Patients in the drain group had a significantly higher re-exploration rate after carotid endarterectomy compared to those who did not receive a drainage (OR=1.24, 95% CI: 1.03-1.49; P=0.02) with no heterogeneity (I²=0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Routine drain placement does not offer complete protection against neck hematoma development and may give the surgeon a false sense of security in wound drainage. Thus, we conclude that drain placement following carotid endarterectomy should be selective, not routine.