Prognostic Value of Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio and Risk Factors for Mortality in Patients with Stanford Type A Aortic Dissection.

BACKGROUND: Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is a prognostic predictor in a wide range of cardiovascular disease. Acute aortic dissection (AD) is an uncommon but fatal cardiovascular disease. In this study, we investigated both prognostic factors in patients with AD and whether NLR can be a predictor for mortality. Methods: We analyzed retrospectively the data of 57 patients with AD who had undergone emergent surgery in our hospital and included 128 consecutive patients with chest pain admitted to the emergency room as a control group. Also, patients who were operated on due to aortic dissection as another subgroup were compared to NLR values. Baseline clinical features, cardiovascular risk factors, and surgical and laboratory parameters were obtained from the hospital database. Results: Patients with AD had higher NLR than the control group (1.7 ± 0.5 versus 7.6 ± 3.3, P < .001). In the AD group, 15 deaths occurred and non-survivors had significantly higher NLR, compared to survivors (11.6 ± 2.4 versus 6.6 ± 2.3, P < .001). In multivariate analysis, high NLR (odds ratio [OR] 1.913, 95% CI 1.030-1.081, P = .04) and cross-clamp time (OR 1.265, 95% CI 1.003-1.596, P = .04) were determined as independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. In receiver operating characteristics curve analyses, the NLR > 9.3 predicted the mortality in AD with a specificity of 91% and a sensitivity of 86% (P < .001). CONCLUSION: This study shows that high NLR can be used as a marker for prognosis in short-term mortality of patient with AD. Additionally, increased lactate level in perioperative period, prolonged cardiopulmonary bypass time, and additional cardiac procedures are strong independent predictors of short-term mortality in patients with acute AD.

Staged or Combined Approach for Carotid Endarterectomy in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A 5-Year-Long Experience.

BACKGROUND: Optimal surgical approach for patients with hemodynamically significant carotid and coronary disease remains controversial. We analyzed our 5-year experience and compared early and long-term outcome following staged and combined carotid and coronary artery bypass. METHODS: 312 consecutive patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy and coronary artery bypass between 2008 and 2013 were prospectively enrolled in the study. Patients were scheduled for a staged (carotid endarterectomy followed by coronary artery bypass within 1 week) procedure (Group S) unless they were unstable in terms of cardiac status (were deemed to a combined procedure; Group C). All patient data including demographics, risk factors, immediate perioperative events, 30-day, and long-term outcome were prospectively recorded and then analyzed. Groups S and C were compared for pre- and perioperative data as well as immediate, 30-day, and long-term survival. A P value less than .05 was considered significant. Survival analysis was made using Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. RESULTS: Group S included 204 patients and Group C included 108 patients. Preoperative demographics and clinical data were similar in the two groups except that preoperative cerebrovascular events were more common in Group C (31.7% versus 22.22%, P = .036) and bilateral carotid disease was more common in Group S. The EuroSCORE was higher in Group C (2.91 versus 2.65, P = .013). Carotid surgery techniques were similar; intraluminal shunting was more frequent in group C than group S (33.33% versus 9.88%, P = .001). Additional cardiac procedures in addition to coronary surgery was predominant in Group C. 30-day neurological adverse event rates, ICU, and hospital stay were significantly higher in Group C. The 30-day mortality was also sigficantly higher in Group C (1.96% versus 4.62%, P = .001). CONCLUSION: Staged and combined surgical approaches yield comparable outcomes. A staged approach may provide a more favorable neurological outcome with significantly reduced need for intraluminal shunting. Long-term outcome is, however, similar.