XIAO Yingkai 1 , ZHEN Jianfan 2 , XIE Junbo 1 , LIU Jie 3 , SONG Jiayu 1 , SUN Tucheng 1
  • 1. Department of Cardiac Surgery, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510080, P. R. China;
  • 2. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Zhongshan City People's Hospital, Zhongshan, 528400, Guangdong, P. R. China;
  • 3. Department of Cardiac Surgery, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510080, P. R. China;
SUN Tucheng, Email: suntucheng@126.com
Coronary endarterectomy; coronary artery bypass grafting; diffuse coronary artery disease; mid-term follow-up; coronary artery disease; major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular event; complete revascularization; readmission
10.7507/1007-4848.202601060
Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables References Cited by

Objective To compare the perioperative and mid-term follow-up outcomes of patients undergoing coronary endarterectomy combined with coronary artery bypass grafting (CE-CABG) versus those undergoing CABG alone. Methods A retrospective cohort of 2 070 patients who underwent surgery for coronary artery disease at the Department of Cardiac Surgery, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital between 2016 and 2024 was included. Patients were excluded if they had missing data, concomitant valve, aortic, or congenital heart surgery, or underwent off-pump CABG. Eligible patients were divided into a CE-CABG group and a CABG group, and 1 : 1 propensity score matching was performed using the "MatchIt" package in R software. Results A total of 202 patients were included after matching (172 males, 30 females), with a mean age of (60.3±7.5) years. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced between the two groups (standardized mean difference<0.1 for all covariates). There were no statistical differences in operative mortality (4.0% vs. 4.0%) or early postoperative major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (4.0% vs. 5.0%, both P >0.05) between the CE-CABG and CABG groups. The CE-CABG group exhibited significantly prolonged operative time [(401.1±105.9) min vs. (353.3±95.6) min], cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time [(206.4±65.2) min vs. (174.6±63.1) min], aortic cross-clamp time [125.0 (101.0, 159.5) min vs. 93.0 (70.0, 126.0) min] and postoperative hospital stay [24.0 (18.5, 33.5) d vs. 21.0 (15.0, 28.0) d] (all P<0.05). During a median follow-up of 33 months (follow-up rate: 93.1%), no statistical differences were observed in all-cause mortality (3.0% vs. 5.5%, P=0.498) or MACCE incidence (14.9% vs. 16.8%, P=0.700) between the two groups. However, the rates of cardiac-related readmission (23.8% vs. 37.6%, P=0.033) and coronary angiography re-examination (13.9% vs. 27.7%, P=0.015) were significantly lower in the CE-CABG group. Conclusion  CE-CABG facilitates complete revascularization in patients with diffuse coronary artery disease (DCAD) without increasing operative mortality or the incidence of MACCE. CE-CABG is associated with longer CPB time, aortic cross-clamp time, operative time, and postoperative hospital length of stay. Follow-up results indicate that CE-CABG reduces the rates of cardiac-related readmission and coronary angiography re-examination in patients with DCAD. These findings demonstrate that the CE procedure itself does not increase operative risk and serves as a safe and effective strategy for achieving complete revascularization in patients with DCAD.

Copyright ? the editorial department of Chinese Journal of Clinical Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery of West China Medical Publisher. All rights reserved