Cargando…

Coexisting Coronary and Carotid Artery Disease: What We Did, What Happened

INTRODUCTION: There is no complete consensus on the three surgical methods and long-term consequences for coexisting coronary and carotid artery disease. We retrospectively evaluated the surgical results in this high-risk group in our clinic for a decade. METHODS: Between 2005 and 2015, 196 patients...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Güney, Mehmet Raşit, Güler, Erhan, Albay, Erkan, Kehlibar, Tamer, Yilmaz, Mehmet, Ketenci, Bülend
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9670345/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35244376
http://dx.doi.org/10.21470/1678-9741-2021-0127
_version_ 1784832315078213632
author Güney, Mehmet Raşit
Güler, Erhan
Albay, Erkan
Kehlibar, Tamer
Yilmaz, Mehmet
Ketenci, Bülend
author_facet Güney, Mehmet Raşit
Güler, Erhan
Albay, Erkan
Kehlibar, Tamer
Yilmaz, Mehmet
Ketenci, Bülend
author_sort Güney, Mehmet Raşit
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: There is no complete consensus on the three surgical methods and long-term consequences for coexisting coronary and carotid artery disease. We retrospectively evaluated the surgical results in this high-risk group in our clinic for a decade. METHODS: Between 2005 and 2015, 196 patients were treated for combined carotid and coronary artery disease. A total of 50 patients were operated on with the staged method, 40 of which had carotid endarterectomy (CEA) priority, and 10 had coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) priority. CABG and CEA were simultaneously performed in 82 patients; and in 64 asymptomatic patients with unilateral carotid artery lesions and stenosis over 70%, only CABG was done (64 patients). Results were evaluated by uni-/multivariate analyses for perioperative, early, and late postoperative data. RESULTS: In the staged group, interval between the operations was 2.82±0.74 months. Perioperative and early postoperative (30 days) parameters did not differ between groups (P-value < 0.05). Postoperative follow-up time was averaged 94.9±38.3 months. Postoperative events were examined in three groups as (A) deaths (all cause), (B) cardiovascular events (non-fatal myocardial infarction, recurrent angina, congestive heart failure, palpitation), and (C) fatal neurological events (amaurosis fugax, transient ischemic attack, and stroke). When group C events were excluded, event-free actuarial survival rates were similar in all three methods (P=0.740). Actuarial survival rate was significantly different when all events were included (P=0.027). Neurological events increased markedly between months 34 and 66 (P=0.004). CONCLUSION: Perioperative and early postoperative event-free survival rates were similar in all three methods. By the beginning of the 34(th) month, the only CABG group has been negatively separated due to neurological events. In the choice of methodology, “most threatened organ priority’’ was considered as clinical parameter.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9670345
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96703452022-11-21 Coexisting Coronary and Carotid Artery Disease: What We Did, What Happened Güney, Mehmet Raşit Güler, Erhan Albay, Erkan Kehlibar, Tamer Yilmaz, Mehmet Ketenci, Bülend Braz J Cardiovasc Surg Original Article INTRODUCTION: There is no complete consensus on the three surgical methods and long-term consequences for coexisting coronary and carotid artery disease. We retrospectively evaluated the surgical results in this high-risk group in our clinic for a decade. METHODS: Between 2005 and 2015, 196 patients were treated for combined carotid and coronary artery disease. A total of 50 patients were operated on with the staged method, 40 of which had carotid endarterectomy (CEA) priority, and 10 had coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) priority. CABG and CEA were simultaneously performed in 82 patients; and in 64 asymptomatic patients with unilateral carotid artery lesions and stenosis over 70%, only CABG was done (64 patients). Results were evaluated by uni-/multivariate analyses for perioperative, early, and late postoperative data. RESULTS: In the staged group, interval between the operations was 2.82±0.74 months. Perioperative and early postoperative (30 days) parameters did not differ between groups (P-value < 0.05). Postoperative follow-up time was averaged 94.9±38.3 months. Postoperative events were examined in three groups as (A) deaths (all cause), (B) cardiovascular events (non-fatal myocardial infarction, recurrent angina, congestive heart failure, palpitation), and (C) fatal neurological events (amaurosis fugax, transient ischemic attack, and stroke). When group C events were excluded, event-free actuarial survival rates were similar in all three methods (P=0.740). Actuarial survival rate was significantly different when all events were included (P=0.027). Neurological events increased markedly between months 34 and 66 (P=0.004). CONCLUSION: Perioperative and early postoperative event-free survival rates were similar in all three methods. By the beginning of the 34(th) month, the only CABG group has been negatively separated due to neurological events. In the choice of methodology, “most threatened organ priority’’ was considered as clinical parameter. Sociedade Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9670345/ /pubmed/35244376 http://dx.doi.org/10.21470/1678-9741-2021-0127 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Güney, Mehmet Raşit
Güler, Erhan
Albay, Erkan
Kehlibar, Tamer
Yilmaz, Mehmet
Ketenci, Bülend
Coexisting Coronary and Carotid Artery Disease: What We Did, What Happened
title Coexisting Coronary and Carotid Artery Disease: What We Did, What Happened
title_full Coexisting Coronary and Carotid Artery Disease: What We Did, What Happened
title_fullStr Coexisting Coronary and Carotid Artery Disease: What We Did, What Happened
title_full_unstemmed Coexisting Coronary and Carotid Artery Disease: What We Did, What Happened
title_short Coexisting Coronary and Carotid Artery Disease: What We Did, What Happened
title_sort coexisting coronary and carotid artery disease: what we did, what happened
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9670345/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35244376
http://dx.doi.org/10.21470/1678-9741-2021-0127
work_keys_str_mv AT guneymehmetrasit coexistingcoronaryandcarotidarterydiseasewhatwedidwhathappened
AT gulererhan coexistingcoronaryandcarotidarterydiseasewhatwedidwhathappened
AT albayerkan coexistingcoronaryandcarotidarterydiseasewhatwedidwhathappened
AT kehlibartamer coexistingcoronaryandcarotidarterydiseasewhatwedidwhathappened
AT yilmazmehmet coexistingcoronaryandcarotidarterydiseasewhatwedidwhathappened
AT ketencibulend coexistingcoronaryandcarotidarterydiseasewhatwedidwhathappened