Background. The importance of predictors of adverse outcomes after coronary bypass surgery needs to be regularly review in view of changing standards of practice. Predicting complications will help reduce current mortality and morbidity among patients who have undergone coronary bypass surgery (CABG). Aims prediction and determination of independent predictors of in-hospital mortality after CABG based on the results of preoperative examination. Methods. In a retrospective cohort single-center study, we analyzed the results of 2239 patients who underwent isolated CABG for the period from September 2018 to August 2021. The primary endpoint of the study was hospital death after CABG. Also, the frequency of: non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, acute heart failure, postoperative rhythm and conduction disorders, acute renal failure, multiple organ failure, infectious complications was analyzed. Next, we searched for independent predictors and built a prognostic model for assessing the risk of death after CABG. Results. Results. Hospital mortality among patients was 1.34% (n = 30). Independent predictors of death after CABG were: ejection fraction (OR 0.91; 95% CI: 0.880.93; p 0.001), body mass index (OR 0.90; 95% CI: 0.820.99; p = 0.035), glomerular filtration rate (OR 0.97; 95% CI: 0.960.99; p = 0.005), repeated CABG (OR 9.3; 95% CI: 2.7431.24; p 0.001), critical atherosclerotic lesion of the arteries of the lower extremities (OR 4.5; 95% CI: 1.93310.268; p 0.001). The model for predicting the probability of death after CABG had high quality metrics: ROC-AUC 0.838 (95% CI: 0.7470.929; p 0.001), sensitivity 72.4%, specificity 84%. The threshold value of the logistic function P at the cut-off point, which corresponded to the highest value of the Yuden index, was 0.015. The outcome was predicted when the value of the logistic function P was higher than or equal to this value. Conclusion. We have developed a model for predicting in-hospital mortality after CABG based on independent linear predictors: left ventricular ejection fraction, body mass index, glomerular filtration rate, repeated CABG, critical atherosclerotic lesion of the main arteries of the lower extremities.

Background: Carotid artery disease is prevalent among patients with coronary heart disease. The concomitant severe lesions in the carotid and coronary arteries may necessitate either simultaneous or staged revascularization involving coronary bypass and carotid endarterectomy. However, there is presently a lack of consensus on the optimal choice of surgical treatment tactics for patients with significant stenoses in both carotid and coronary arteries. The aim of the current study was to compare the 30-day and long-term outcomes of coronary and carotid artery revascularization surgery based on the simultaneous or staged surgical tactics. Material and Methods: This single-center retrospective study involved 192 patients with concurrent coronary artery disease and carotid artery stenosis ≥ 70%, of whom 106 patients underwent simultaneous intervention (CABG + CEA) and 86 patients underwent staged CABG/CEA. The mean time between stages ranged from 1 to 4 months (mean 1.88 ± 0.9 months). The endpoints included death from any cause, non-fatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) (death + non-fatal MI + non-fatal stroke) within 30 days after the last intervention and in the long-term follow-up period (median follow-up—6 years). Results: The 30-day all-cause mortality, incidence of postoperative non-fatal MI, non-fatal stroke, and MACEs did not exhibit differences between the groups after single-stage and staged interventions. However, the overall risk of postoperative complications (adjusted for the risk of any complication per patient) (OR 2.214, 95% CI 1.048–4.674, p = 0.035), as well as the duration of ventilatory support (p = 0.004), was elevated in the group after simultaneous interventions compared with the staged intervention group. This difference did not result in an increased incidence of death and MACEs in the group after simultaneous interventions. In the long-term follow-up period, there were no significant differences observed when comparing simultaneous or staged surgical tactics in terms of overall survival (54.9% and 62.6% in Groups 1 and 2, respectively, P log-rank = 0.068), non-fatal stroke-free survival (45.6% and 33.6% in Groups 1 and 2, respectively, P log-rank = 0.364), non-fatal MI-survival (57.6% and 73.5% in Groups 1 and 2, respectively, P log-rank = 0.169), and MACE-free survival (7.1% and 30.2% in Groups 1 and 2, respectively, P log-rank = 0.060). The risk factors associated with an unfavorable outcome included age, smoking, BMI, LV EF, and atherosclerosis of the lower extremity arteries. Conclusions: This study revealed no significant difference in the impact of simultaneous CABG + CEA or staged CABG/CEA on the incidence of death, stroke, MI, and MACEs over a 30-day and long-term follow-up period. Although the immediate results indicated an increased risk of a complicated course (attributable to overall complications) and more prolonged ventilation after simultaneous CABG + CEA compared with staged CABG/CEA, this did not lead to an increase in fatal complications. Therefore, the implementation of either tactic is considered eligible and appropriate following a thorough operative risk assessment.

Background. Carotid artery disease is prevalent among patients with coronary heart disease. The concomitant severe lesions in the carotid and coronary arteries may necessitate either simultaneous or staged revascularization, involving coronary bypass and carotid endarterectomy. However, there is presently a lack of consensus on the optimal choice of surgical treatment tactics for patients with significant stenoses in both carotid and coronary arteries. The aim of the current study was to compare the 30-day and long-term outcomes of coronary and carotid artery revascularization surgery based on the simultaneous or staged surgical tactics. Material and Methods. The single-center, non-randomized retrospective study involved 192 patients with concurrent coronary artery disease and carotid artery stenosis ≥70%, of whom 106 patients underwent simultaneous intervention (CABG+CEA), and 86 patients underwent staged CABG/CEA. The mean time between stages ranged from 1 to 4 months (mean 1.88±0.9 months). Endpoints included death from any cause, nonfatal stroke, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (death + nonfatal MI + nonfatal stroke) within 30 days after the last intervention and in the long-term follow-up period (median follow-up - 6 years). Results: The 30-day all-cause mortality, incidence of postoperative nonfatal MI, nonfatal stroke, and MACE did not exhibit differences between the groups after single-stage and staged interventions. However, the overall risk of postoperative complications (adjusted for the risk of any complication per patient) (OR 2.214, 95% CI 0.214-0.954, p=0.034), as well as the duration of ventilatory support (p=0.004), were elevated in the group after simultaneous interventions compared with the staged intervention group. However, this difference did not result in an increased incidence of death and MACE in the group after simultaneous interventions. In the long-term follow-up period, there were no significant differences observed when comparing simultaneous or staged surgical tactics in terms of overall survival (54.9% and 62.6% in groups 1 and 2, respectively, P log-rank = 0.068), nonfatal stroke-free survival (45.6% and 33.6% in groups 1 and 2, respectively, P log-rank = 0.364), nonfatal MI-survival (57.6% and 73.5% in groups 1 and 2, respectively, P log-rank = 0.169), and MACE-free survival (7.1% and 30.2% in groups 1 and 2, respectively, P log-rank = 0.060). Risk factors associated with an unfavorable outcome included age, smoking, BMI, LV EF, and atherosclerosis of lower limb arteries. Conclusions: This study revealed no significant difference in the impact of simultaneous CABG+CEA or staged CABG/CEA on the incidence of death, stroke, MI, and MACE over a 30-day and long-term follow-up period. Although the immediate results indicated an increased risk of a complicated course (attributable to overall complications) after simultaneous CABG+CEA compared with staged CABG/CEA, this did not lead to an increase in fatal complications. Therefore, performing both tactics is deemed safe and eligible after a meticulous postoperative risk assessment.