@entity1028 and significant XXXX : strategies and options.

@entity1 @entity449 @entity439 @entity453 @entity204 @entity1028 @entity1756
OBJECTIVES: The optimal treatment for @entity1 requiring intervention for @entity453 ( @entity453 ) and concomitant large or symptomatic @entity1028 ( @entity1028 ) remains problematic. METHODS: Retrospective analysis was performed of 32 @entity1 with symptomatic or large (> cm) @entity1028 along with significant @entity453 treated over the past fifteen years at a university hospital. RESULTS: Mean @entity1028 diameter was 6.6 cm. @entity453 involved 3 or more vessels in all @entity1 . Fifteen @entity1 underwent staged coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) followed by open @entity1028 repair, with two (13%) dying as a result of @entity1756 in the early postoperative period. No major complications were encountered among five @entity1 receiving staged coronary angioplasty before open @entity1028 repair and two @entity1 undergoing staged CABG followed by @entity439 repair. Ten @entity1 underwent concomitant CABG and @entity1028 repair, with a single intraoperative @entity204 (10%). No differences in morbidity were observed among @entity1 undergoing concomitant procedures as compared with those subjected to staged procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive interventions for coronary revascularization and @entity449 repair appear to be safe and effective options in properly selected high-risk @entity1 . While optimal management must be individualized, these data suggest that either staged or concomitant CABG and @entity1028 repair may be viable options when minimally invasive interventions are not feasible.
