The influence of concurrent carotid endarterectomy on coronary bypass: a case-controlled study

John J Ricotta1, L Philipp Wall, Eugene Blackstone

  • 1State University of New York at Stony Brook, Rm. 19-020, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USA.

Insights

Concurrent carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) carry higher risks. However, risk-matched analysis shows complications are due to patient factors, not the combined procedure itself.

Area of Science:

  • Cardiovascular Surgery
  • Neurosurgery
  • Vascular Surgery

Background:

  • Concurrent carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are associated with increased stroke and death rates compared to isolated CABG.
  • The higher complication rate may stem from the combined procedures or from patients having more extensive atherosclerosis.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To determine if the increased morbidity and mortality associated with combined CEA-CABG is due to the combined procedures or patient-specific risk factors.
  • To compare outcomes of combined CEA-CABG with isolated CABG and a risk-matched cohort.

Main Methods:

  • A case-controlled study utilized data from the New York State Cardiac Database (1997-1998).
  • Patients undergoing combined CEA-CABG were compared to all isolated CABG patients and a risk-matched cohort of isolated CABG patients.

Main Results:

  • The combined CEA-CABG group (744 patients) had higher rates of stroke (5.1% vs 2%), death (4.4% vs 2%), and combined events (8.1% vs 3.7%) than the overall isolated CABG group (35,539 patients).
  • After risk-factor matching, no significant differences in stroke (5.1% vs 5%), death (4.4% vs 3.9%), or combined events (8.1% vs 8.5%) were observed between the combined CEA-CABG and the matched isolated CABG cohorts.

Conclusions:

  • Increased complications after combined CEA-CABG are comparable to those in a risk-matched cohort of isolated CABG patients.
  • The major morbidity associated with combined CEA-CABG is primarily attributable to inherent patient risk factors, not the addition of CEA to CABG.
Abstract