Dataset Information

Safety of Simultaneous Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting and Carotid Endarterectomy Versus Isolated Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

ABSTRACT: The optimal operative strategy in patients with severe carotid artery disease undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is unknown. We sought to investigate the safety and efficacy of synchronous combined carotid endarterectomy and CABG as compared with isolated CABG.Patients with asymptomatic high-grade carotid artery stenosis ?80% according to ECST (European Carotid Surgery Trial) ultrasound criteria (corresponding to ?70% NASCET [North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial]) who required CABG surgery were randomly assigned to synchronous carotid endarterectomy+CABG or isolated CABG. To avoid unbalanced prognostic factor distributions, randomization was stratified by center, age, sex, and modified Rankin Scale. The primary composite end point was the rate of stroke or death at 30 days.From 2010 to 2014, a total of 129 patients were enrolled at 17 centers in Germany and the Czech Republic. Because of withdrawal of funding after insufficient recruitment, enrolment was terminated early. At 30 days, the rate of any stroke or death in the intention-to-treat population was 12/65 (18.5%) in patients receiving synchronous carotid endarterectomy+CABG as compared with 6/62 (9.7%) in patients receiving isolated CABG (absolute risk reduction, 8.8%; 95% confidence interval, -3.2% to 20.8%; PWALD=0.12). Also for all secondary end points at 30 days and 1 year, there was no evidence for a significant treatment-group effect although patients undergoing isolated CABG tended to have better outcomes.Although our results cannot rule out a treatment-group effect because of lack of power, a superiority of the synchronous combined carotid endarterectomy+CABG approach seems unlikely. Five-year follow-up of patients is still ongoing.URL: https://www.controlled-trials.com. Unique identifier: ISRCTN13486906.

SUBMITTER: Weimar C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5610560 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Safety of Simultaneous Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting and Carotid Endarterectomy Versus Isolated Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Weimar Christian C Bilbilis Konstantinos K Rekowski Jan J Holst Torulv T Beyersdorf Friedhelm F Breuer Martin M Dahm Manfred M Diegeler Anno A Kowalski Arne A Martens Sven S Mohr Friedrich W FW Ondrášek Jiri J Reiter Beate B Roth Peter P Seipelt Ralf R Siggelkow Markus M Steinhoff Gustav G Moritz Anton A Wilhelmi Mathias M Wimmer-Greinecker Gerhard G Diener Hans-Christoph HC Jakob Heinz H Ose Claudia C Scherag Andre A Knipp Stephan C SC

Stroke 20170915 10

<h4>Background and purpose</h4>The optimal operative strategy in patients with severe carotid artery disease undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is unknown. We sought to investigate the safety and efficacy of synchronous combined carotid endarterectomy and CABG as compared with isolated CABG.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients with asymptomatic high-grade carotid artery stenosis ≥80% according to ECST (European Carotid Surgery Trial) ultrasound criteria (corresponding to ≥70% NASCET [North Am ...[more]

PMID: 28916664

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThe Cardiothoracic Surgical Trials Network reported that left ventricular reverse remodeling at 2 years did not differ between patients with moderate ischemic mitral regurgitation randomized to coronary artery bypass grafting plus mitral valve repair (n = 150) or coronary artery bypass grafting alone (n = 151). To address health resource use implications, we compared costs and quality-adjusted survival.MethodsWe used individual patient data from the Cardiothoracic Surgical Trials Network trial on survival, hospitalizations, quality of life, and US hospitalization costs to estimate cumulative costs and quality-adjusted life years. A microsimulation model was developed to extrapolate to 10 years. Bootstrap and deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed to address uncertainty.ResultsIn-hospital costs were $59,745 for coronary artery bypass grafting plus mitral valve repair versus $51,326 for coronary artery bypass grafting alone (difference $8419; 95% uncertainty interval, 2259-18,757). Two-year costs were $81,263 versus $67,341 (difference 13,922 [2370 to 28,888]), and quality-adjusted life years were 1.35 versus 1.30 (difference 0.05; -0.04 to 0.14), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $308,343/quality-adjusted life year for coronary artery bypass grafting plus mitral valve repair. At 10 years, its costs remained higher ($107,733 vs $88,583, difference 19,150 [-3866 to 56,826]) and quality-adjusted life years showed no difference (-0.92 to 0.87), with 5.08 versus 5.08. The likelihood that coronary artery bypass grafting plus mitral valve repair would be considered cost-effective at 10 years based on a cost-effectiveness threshold of $100K/quality-adjusted life year did not exceed 37%. Only when this procedure reduces the death rate by a relative 5% will the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio fall below $100K/quality-adjusted life year.ConclusionsThe addition of mitral valve repair to coronary artery bypass grafting for patients with moderate ischemic mitral regurgitation is unlikely to be cost-effective. Only if late mortality benefits can be demonstrated will it meet commonly used cost-effectiveness criteria.

Project description:BackgroundThe concept of hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) combines the left internal mammary artery (LIMA)-left anterior descending (LAD) graft and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to non-LAD vessels. Multiple comparative studies have evaluated the safety and feasibility of HCR and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for multivessel coronary artery disease (MCAD). However, the sample size of each study was small, and evidences based on single-institutional experience. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the short-term outcomes of HCR with those of CABG for MCAD.MethodPubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases, as well as conference proceedings, were searched for eligible studies published up to March 2014. We calculated summary odds ratios (OR) for primary endpoints (death, stroke; myocardial infarction (MI); target vessel revascularization (TVR); major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCEs)) and secondary endpoints (atrial fibrillation (AF); renal failure; length of stay in the intensive care unit (LoS in ICU); length of stay in hospital (LoS in hospital); red blood cell (RBC) transfusion). Data from 6176 participants were derived from ten cohort studies.ResultsHCR was non-inferior to CABG in terms of MACCEs during hospitalization (odds ratio (OR), 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.34-1.33)and at one-year follow-up(0.32, 0.05-1.89) , and no significant difference was found between HCR and CABG groups in in-hospital and one-year follow-up outcomes of death, MI, stroke, the prevalence of AF and renal failure, whereas HCR was associated with a lower requirement of RBC transfusion and shorter LoS in ICU and LoS in hospital than CABG (weighted mean difference (WMD) -1.25, 95% CI, -1.62 to -0.88; -17.47, -31.01 to -3.93; -1.77, -3.07 to -0.46; respectively).ConclusionOur meta-analysis indicates that HCR is feasible, safe and effective for the treatment of MCAD, with similar in-hospital and one-year follow-up outcome, significantly lower requirement of RBC transfusion, and faster recovery compared with CABG.

Dataset Information

Safety of Simultaneous Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting and Carotid Endarterectomy Versus Isolated Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Publications

Safety of Simultaneous Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting and Carotid Endarterectomy Versus Isolated Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets