Clinical Impact of Routine Cardiology Consultation Prior to Elective Carotid Endarterectomy in Neurologically Asymptomatic Patients. (April 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Squizzato, Francesco; Antonello, Michele; Taglialavoro, Jacopo; Prosdocimi, Linda; Grego, Franco; Lupia, Mario; Piazza, Michele
• Is Part Of: European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery. Volume 59:Number 4(2020)
• Page Start: 536
• Page End: 544
• Publication Date: 2020-04
• Subjects: Cardiology -- Cardiovascular disease -- Carotid endarterectomy -- Myocardial infarction -- Post-operative complications -- Referral and consultation; Blood-vessels -- Endoscopic surgery -- Periodicals; Blood-vessels -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Vascular Surgical Procedures -- Periodicals; Vascular Surgical Procedures -- methods -- Periodicals; Vaisseaux sanguins -- Chirurgie -- Périodiques; Vaisseaux sanguins -- Chirurgie endoscopique -- Périodiques; Blood-vessels -- Endoscopic surgery; Blood-vessels -- Surgery; Endoscopy; Electronic journals; Periodicals; Electronic journals; 617.413005
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2019.11.007
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1078-5884

Abstract

Abstract : Objective: The aim was to determine the clinical impact of routine cardiology consultation before carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in neurologically asymptomatic patients, in terms of early and long term cardiovascular events. Methods: A single centre retrospective review of consecutive patients receiving CEA from 2007 to 2017 for asymptomatic carotid stenosis was performed. Two groups were compared: patients operated on from 2007 to 2012 received a pre-operative cardiology consultation only in selected cases (group A); from 2012 to 2017 patients received a routine pre-operative cardiology consultation (group B). In hospital death, myocardial infarction (MI), heart failure, dysrhythmias, and stroke were compared. A multiple logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of peri-operative complications. Long term overall survival and freedom from fatal cardiovascular events were compared. Results: In total, 878 CEAs were performed in group A and 1094 in group B. Patients in group B were more likely to have had a previous coronary intervention (0.5% vs. 5.1%; p < .001), and to be on dual antiplatelet (4.6% vs. 9.5%; p = .001), statin therapy (60.3% vs. 72.4%; p < .001), and a higher number of cardiac drugs (1.77 ± 1.22 vs. 1.92 ± 1.23; p = .01) at the time of CEA. In hospital mortality was 0.1% for both groups ( p = 1.0), and there were no significant differences regarding neurological complications (0.8% vs. 0.3%; p = .20); group B had a significant reduction in overall cardiac complications (3.4% vs. 1.9%; p = .05) and MI (1.6% vs. 0.6%; p = .05). Multivariable analysis confirmed that routine cardiology consultation was an independent predictor of MI (odds [OR] ratio 0.61; p = .04) and overall reduction in cardiac complications (OR 0.28; p = .01). At five years, overall survival was similar (84.2% vs. 82.4%; p = .72), but patients in group B had a significantly lower mortality from cardiovascular events (92.0% vs. 95.8%; p = .04). Conclusion: Routine cardiology consultation before elective CEA in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis reduced peri-operative cardiac complications and long term fatal cardiovascular events. This approach may be considered to maximise the risk/benefit ratio of CEA in asymptomatic patients.