Comparison of Coronary Bypass Grafting Surgery with Carotid Endarterectomy and Coronary Bypass Grafting Surgery

Aykut Şahin, Cengiz Ovalı
{"title":"Comparison of Coronary Bypass Grafting Surgery with Carotid Endarterectomy and Coronary Bypass Grafting Surgery","authors":"Aykut Şahin, Cengiz Ovalı","doi":"10.4236/wjcs.2020.101002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Treatment of combined coronary artery surgery (CABG) and severe carotid \nartery stenosis is still controversial. The decision of surgical priority can \nchange according to the severity of the coronary artery disease or carotid \nartery disease at staged surgery. The aim of the study is to compare the \noutcomes of simultaneous surgery (CEA + CABG) and CABG alone at our department. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the CABG and CEA + \nCABG patients which were performed between 2010 and 2015. If the patients had simultaneous \nanother operation, they were excluded from the study. A total of 294 patients \n(252 CABG patients and 42 combined surgery patients), were retrospectively \nexamined. Results: Two patients in CABG group and two patients in CABG + \nCEA group developed stroke. There was no statistically significant \ndifference between the two groups in terms of early stroke rate (p > 0.05). \nOne patient in CEA + CABG group and three patients in CABG group died. The average \ncarotid clamp time was 19.93 ± 5.06 minutes. Aortic clamp times were 42.89 ± \n6.38 minutes in CABG and 42.81 ± 5.70 minutes in CEA + CABG patients. Results \nof the two groups were similar. Conclusion: Combined CEA and CABG can be \nperformed successfully and safely in patients.","PeriodicalId":23646,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4236/wjcs.2020.101002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Treatment of combined coronary artery surgery (CABG) and severe carotid artery stenosis is still controversial. The decision of surgical priority can change according to the severity of the coronary artery disease or carotid artery disease at staged surgery. The aim of the study is to compare the outcomes of simultaneous surgery (CEA + CABG) and CABG alone at our department. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the CABG and CEA + CABG patients which were performed between 2010 and 2015. If the patients had simultaneous another operation, they were excluded from the study. A total of 294 patients (252 CABG patients and 42 combined surgery patients), were retrospectively examined. Results: Two patients in CABG group and two patients in CABG + CEA group developed stroke. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of early stroke rate (p > 0.05). One patient in CEA + CABG group and three patients in CABG group died. The average carotid clamp time was 19.93 ± 5.06 minutes. Aortic clamp times were 42.89 ± 6.38 minutes in CABG and 42.81 ± 5.70 minutes in CEA + CABG patients. Results of the two groups were similar. Conclusion: Combined CEA and CABG can be performed successfully and safely in patients.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
冠状动脉旁路移植术与颈动脉内膜切除术及冠状动脉旁路移植术的比较
简介:冠状动脉联合手术(CABG)治疗严重颈动脉狭窄仍存在争议。分期手术可根据冠状动脉病变或颈动脉病变的严重程度而改变手术优先级的决定。本研究的目的是比较我科同时手术(CEA + CABG)和单独CABG的结果。材料与方法:我们回顾性分析2010 - 2015年间行CABG和CEA + CABG的患者。如果患者同时进行了其他手术,则将其排除在研究之外。回顾性分析了294例患者(252例冠脉搭桥患者和42例联合手术患者)。结果:CABG组2例,CABG + CEA组2例发生脑卒中。两组早期脑卒中发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(p > 0.05)。CEA + CABG组1例死亡,CABG组3例死亡。颈动脉夹持时间平均为19.93±5.06 min。主动脉夹钳时间CABG组为42.89±6.38 min, CEA + CABG组为42.81±5.70 min。两组结果相似。结论:CEA联合冠脉搭桥术可以成功、安全地进行。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Acute Myocardial Infarction: Mode of Revelation of a Left Atrium Myxoma Cardiac Manifestations with Chemotherapeutic Agents: 5 Fluorouracil-Induced Coronary Artery Vasospasm Microbiological and Antibiotic Susceptibility Patterns in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Intensive Care Unit of a Tertiary Level Hospital in Nepal Cardiovascular Function during First 24 Hours after Off-Pump and On-Pump CABG—A Prospective Observational Comparative Study Is Anticoagulation Warranted after Left Atrial Appendage Ligation in Patients at Risk for Stroke after Cardiac Surgery?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1