Key result
Simultaneous coronary artery bypass graft and carotid endarterectomy was associated with an early mortality of 2.1%, a perioperative stroke rate of 1.4%, and a 7-year survival of 74.7%.
Why the study?
Is a combined surgical approach (simultaneous CABG and CEA) safe and effective in patients with coexistent carotid and coronary artery disease?
Observational (n=139)
Is a combined surgical approach (simultaneous CABG and CEA) safe and effective in patients with coexistent carotid and coronary artery disease?
Simultaneous CABG and carotid endarterectomy is a safe and effective approach for patients with coexistent coronary and carotid artery disease, demonstrating low perioperative complication rates and good long-term survival.
Low event rates may support use in select patients; extends observational data but leaves open need for randomized confirmation.
Background: The management of patients with simultaneous coronary artery and carotid artery disease is still controversial. Methods: A retrospective review of the records and follow-up data of 139 consecutive patients undergoing simultaneous coronary artery bypass graft and carotid endarterectomy from 1981 to 1999 was carried out. Results: Early mortality was 2.1%, perioperative myocardial infarction and stroke rates were 2.8 and 1.4%, respectively. Survival at 7 years was 74.7 ±5.1% and event-free survival at 7 years was 67.9 ± 5.6%. Conclusions: The combined surgical approach has proved to be effective and safe allowing the treatment of both diseases in a single operative procedure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vitali et al. (2003) conducted an observational in Coexistent Carotid and Coronary Artery Disease (n=139). Simultaneous coronary artery bypass graft and carotid endarterectomy was evaluated on Early mortality. Simultaneous coronary artery bypass graft and carotid endarterectomy was associated with an early mortality of 2.1%, a perioperative stroke rate of 1.4%, and a 7-year survival of 74.7%.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: