Synchronous or Staged Carotid Endarterectomy and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting? Propensity score matched study

Sebastian Hempe; Ajay Moza; Andreas Goetzenich; Lachmandath Tewarie; Christian Bleilevens; Rüdiger Autschbach; Heike Schnoering; Rashad Zayat

doi:10.1532/hsf.2074

Authors

Sebastian Hempe Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstrasse 30, Aachen 52074, Germany
Ajay Moza Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstrasse 30, Aachen 52074, Germany
Andreas Goetzenich Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstrasse 30, Aachen 52074, Germany
Lachmandath Tewarie Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstrasse 30, Aachen 52074, Germany
Christian Bleilevens Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstrasse 30, Aachen 52074, Germany
Rüdiger Autschbach Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstrasse 30, Aachen 52074, Germany
Heike Schnoering Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstrasse 30, Aachen 52074, Germany
Rashad Zayat Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstrasse 30, Aachen 52074, Germany

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1532/hsf.2074

Abstract

Background: The optimal treatment strategy in patients presenting with hemodynamically significant carotid artery disease who are to undergo cardiac surgery, remains controversial. In this study, we retrospectively analyzed the outcome data of patients receiving synchronous or staged coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and carotid endarterectomy (CEA).

Methods: Between 2011 and 2016, 3173 patients underwent CABG surgery in our institution, of whom 323 received CABG and CEA either as synchronous (N = 307) or as staged (N = 16) procedures. Patients´ characteristics, peri- and postoperative data were collected from our digital medical database. Propensity score matching was used to match each patient from the staged group to two appropriate patients (1:2 matching) from the synchronous group (synchronousmatched).

Results: The overall incidence of ischemic stroke (IS) and transitory ischemic attack (TIA) was 4.9% and 5.6%, respectively. No hemorrhagic stroke was noted in both groups. Incidence of IS did not differ significantly between matched groups (P = 1.000). Significantly higher rates of postoperative neurological complications, such as TIA and delirium, were found in the synchronousmatched group (P = .041 and P = .043, respectively) compared with the staged group. Additionally, there were more postoperative respiratory insufficiencies in the synchronousmatched group (P = .043). Thirty days mortality did not differ significantly between the matched groups.

Conclusion: In this experience combined with the data given in literature, our findings suggest a possible superiority of the staged CABG/CEA approach. Large, randomized studies are required to verify our findings and to establish applicable guidelines.