M. R. Güney, Erhan Güler, Erkan Albay, T. Kehlibar, Mehmet Yılmaz, B. Ketenci
{"title":"共存的冠状动脉和颈动脉疾病:我们做了什么,发生了什么","authors":"M. R. Güney, Erhan Güler, Erkan Albay, T. Kehlibar, Mehmet Yılmaz, B. Ketenci","doi":"10.21470/1678-9741-2021-0127","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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 34th 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.","PeriodicalId":54481,"journal":{"name":"Revista Brasileira De Cirurgia Cardiovascular","volume":"37 1","pages":"648 - 653"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Coexisting Coronary and Carotid Artery Disease: What We Did, What Happened\",\"authors\":\"M. R. Güney, Erhan Güler, Erkan Albay, T. Kehlibar, Mehmet Yılmaz, B. Ketenci\",\"doi\":\"10.21470/1678-9741-2021-0127\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"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 34th 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.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54481,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Brasileira De Cirurgia Cardiovascular\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"648 - 653\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Brasileira De Cirurgia Cardiovascular\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21470/1678-9741-2021-0127\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Brasileira De Cirurgia Cardiovascular","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21470/1678-9741-2021-0127","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
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 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 34th 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.
期刊介绍:
Brazilian Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery (BJCVS) is the official journal of the Brazilian Society of Cardiovascular Surgery (SBCCV). BJCVS is a bimonthly, peer-reviewed scientific journal, with regular circulation since 1986.
BJCVS aims to record the scientific and innovation production in cardiovascular surgery and promote study, improvement and professional updating in the specialty. It has significant impact on cardiovascular surgery practice and related areas.