Clinical implication of coronary artery bypass graft with surgical ventricular reconstruction in patients with left ventricular dysfunction in the current clinical practice.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Akao K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10482635 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Clinical implication of coronary artery bypass graft with surgical ventricular reconstruction in patients with left ventricular dysfunction in the current clinical practice.
Akao Kousuke K Imamura Teruhiko T
Journal of thoracic disease 20230801 8
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10482620 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients with chronic myocardial infarction (MI) and severe left ventricular (LV) dysfunction have poor clinical outcomes. This study aimed to determine whether coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) with surgical ventricular reconstruction (SVR) leads to further improvement in long-term patient outcomes compared with isolated CABG (I-CABG).MethodsFrom April 2010 to June 2013, 140 consecutive patients with chronic MI and severe LV dysfunction who received contrast-enhanced cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CE-CMR) within 1 month before surgery were enrolled in this study. The cardiovascular events (CVEs) and long-term survival of patients who underwent CABG and SVR were compared with those who met the criteria for SVR but received I-CABG.ResultsA total of 140 patients were included in the final analysis, including 70 patients who underwent CABG and SVR and 70 patients who underwent I-CABG. No differences were observed in the baseline characteristics, LV function, and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) between the two groups. CABG+SVR patients experienced a longer cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time (116.0±35.0 vs. 100.2±23.8 minutes, P=0.002) and ventilation time [median (interquartile range): 22.0 (17.0, 37.0) vs. 20.0 (15.0, 24.0) hours, P=0.019] than I-CABG patients. During a mean follow-up of 123.1±12.7 months (range, 102-140 months), the CABG+SVR group had fewer rehospitalizations for congestive heart failure (CHF) (4.3% vs. 19.1%, P=0.007), but no statistical difference in the mortality rate was observed (2.9% vs. 4.4%, P=0.987). The cumulative CVE-free survival rate was significantly higher in CABG+SVR patients (87.0% vs. 67.6%, P=0.007).ConclusionsOur findings indicated that patients with chronic MI and severe LV dysfunction experienced similar perioperative outcomes after CABG+SVR or I-CABG. However, the CABG+SVR group resulted in fewer rehospitalizations for CHF and a higher cumulative CVE-free survival rate.
| S-EPMC10183509 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The present analysis of the Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure randomized trial data examined the left ventricular volumes at baseline and 4 months after surgery to determine whether any magnitude of postoperative reduction in end-systolic volume affected survival after coronary artery bypass grafting alone compared with bypass grafting plus surgical ventricular reconstruction.Of the 1000 patients randomized, 555 underwent an operation and had a paired imaging assessment with the same modality at baseline and 4 months postoperatively. Of the remaining 455 patients, 424 either died before the 4-month study or did not have paired imaging tests and were excluded, and 21 were not considered because they had died before surgery or did not receive surgery.Surgical ventricular reconstruction resulted in improved survival compared with coronary artery bypass grafting alone when the postoperative end-systolic volume index was 70 mL/m(2) or less. However, the opposite was true for patients achieving a postoperative volume index greater than 70 mL/m(2). A reduction in the end-systolic volume index of 30% or more compared with baseline was an infrequent event in both treatment groups and did not produce a statistically significant survival benefit with ventricular reconstruction.In patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting plus surgical ventricular reconstruction, a survival benefit was realized compared with bypass alone, with the achievement of a postoperative end-systolic volume index of 70 mL/m(2) or less. Extensive ventricular remodeling at baseline might limit the ability of ventricular reconstruction to achieve a sufficient reduction in volume and clinical benefit.
| S-EPMC3810307 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSurgical ventricular reconstruction is a specific procedure designed to reduce left ventricular volume in patients with heart failure caused by coronary artery disease. We conducted a trial to address the question of whether surgical ventricular reconstruction added to coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) would decrease the rate of death or hospitalization for cardiac causes, as compared with CABG alone.MethodsBetween September 2002 and January 2006, a total of 1000 patients with an ejection fraction of 35% or less, coronary artery disease that was amenable to CABG, and dominant anterior left ventricular dysfunction that was amenable to surgical ventricular reconstruction were randomly assigned to undergo either CABG alone (499 patients) or CABG with surgical ventricular reconstruction (501 patients). The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause and hospitalization for cardiac causes. The median follow-up was 48 months.ResultsSurgical ventricular reconstruction reduced the end-systolic volume index by 19%, as compared with a reduction of 6% with CABG alone. Cardiac symptoms and exercise tolerance improved from baseline to a similar degree in the two study groups. However, no significant difference was observed in the primary outcome, which occurred in 292 patients (59%) who were assigned to undergo CABG alone and in 289 patients (58%) who were assigned to undergo CABG with surgical ventricular reconstruction (hazard ratio for the combined approach, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.84 to 1.17; P=0.90).ConclusionsAdding surgical ventricular reconstruction to CABG reduced the left ventricular volume, as compared with CABG alone. However, this anatomical change was not associated with a greater improvement in symptoms or exercise tolerance or with a reduction in the rate of death or hospitalization for cardiac causes. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00023595.)
| S-EPMC3265934 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesIn the Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure trial, surgical ventricular reconstruction plus coronary artery bypass surgery was not associated with a reduction in the rate of death or cardiac hospitalization compared with bypass alone. We hypothesized that the absence of viable myocardium identifies patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction who have a greater benefit with coronary artery bypass graft surgery and surgical ventricular reconstruction compared with bypass alone.MethodsMyocardial viability was assessed by single photon computed tomography in 267 of the 1000 patients randomized to bypass or bypass plus surgical ventricular reconstruction in the Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure. Myocardial viability was assessed on a per patient basis and regionally according to prespecified criteria.ResultsAt 3 years, there was no difference in mortality or the combined outcome of death or cardiac hospitalization between those with and without viability, and there was no significant interaction between the type of surgery and the global viability status with respect to mortality or death plus cardiac hospitalization. Furthermore, there was no difference in mortality or death plus cardiac hospitalization between those with and without anterior wall or apical scar, and no significant interaction between the presence of scar in these regions and the type of surgery with respect to mortality.ConclusionsIn patients with coronary artery disease and severe regional left ventricular dysfunction, assessment of myocardial viability does not identify patients who will derive a mortality benefit from adding surgical ventricular reconstruction to coronary artery bypass graft surgery.
| S-EPMC4250319 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9579804 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe STICH (Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure) trial compared a strategy of routine coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with guideline-based medical therapy for patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction.ObjectiveTo describe treatment-related quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes, a major prespecified secondary end point in the STICH trial.DesignRandomized trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00023595).Setting99 clinical sites in 22 countries.Patients1212 patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 0.35 or less and coronary artery disease.InterventionRandom assignment to medical therapy alone (602 patients) or medical therapy plus CABG (610 patients).MeasurementsA battery of QOL instruments at baseline (98.9% complete) and 4, 12, 24, and 36 months after randomization (collection rates were 80% to 89% of those eligible). The principal prespecified QOL measure was the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, which assesses the effect of heart failure on patients' symptoms, physical function, social limitations, and QOL.ResultsThe Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score was consistently higher (more favorable) in the CABG group than in the medical therapy group by 4.4 points (95% CI, 1.8 to 7.0 points) at 4 months, 5.8 points (CI, 3.1 to 8.6 points) at 12 months, 4.1 points (CI, 1.2 to 7.1 points) at 24 months, and 3.2 points (CI, 0.2 to 6.3 points) at 36 months. Sensitivity analyses to account for the effect of mortality on follow-up QOL measurement were consistent with the primary findings.LimitationTherapy was not masked.ConclusionIn this cohort of symptomatic high-risk patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction and multivessel coronary artery disease, CABG plus medical therapy produced clinically important improvements in quality of life compared with medical therapy alone over 36 months.Primary funding sourceNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.
| S-EPMC4182862 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe role of coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) in the treatment of patients with coronary artery disease and heart failure has not been clearly established.MethodsBetween July 2002 and May 2007, a total of 1212 patients with an ejection fraction of 35% or less and coronary artery disease amenable to CABG were randomly assigned to medical therapy alone (602 patients) or medical therapy plus CABG (610 patients). The primary outcome was the rate of death from any cause. Major secondary outcomes included the rates of death from cardiovascular causes and of death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes.ResultsThe primary outcome occurred in 244 patients (41%) in the medical-therapy group and 218 (36%) in the CABG group (hazard ratio with CABG, 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72 to 1.04; P=0.12). A total of 201 patients (33%) in the medical-therapy group and 168 (28%) in the CABG group died from an adjudicated cardiovascular cause (hazard ratio with CABG, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.00; P=0.05). Death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes occurred in 411 patients (68%) in the medical-therapy group and 351 (58%) in the CABG group (hazard ratio with CABG, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.85; P<0.001). By the end of the follow-up period (median, 56 months), 100 patients in the medical-therapy group (17%) underwent CABG, and 555 patients in the CABG group (91%) underwent CABG.ConclusionsIn this randomized trial, there was no significant difference between medical therapy alone and medical therapy plus CABG with respect to the primary end point of death from any cause. Patients assigned to CABG, as compared with those assigned to medical therapy alone, had lower rates of death from cardiovascular causes and of death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and Abbott Laboratories; STICH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00023595.).
| S-EPMC3415273 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8987330 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsThe Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure (STICH) trial demonstrated no overall benefit when surgical ventricular reconstruction (SVR) was added to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy. The present analysis was to determine whether, based on baseline left ventricular (LV) function parameters, any subgroups could be identified that benefited from SVR.Methods and resultsAmong the 1000 patients enrolled, Core Lab measures of baseline LV function with adequate quality were obtained in 710 patients using echocardiography, in 352 using cardiovascular magnetic resonance, and in 344 using radionuclide imaging. The relationship between LV end-systolic volume index (ESVI), end-diastolic volume index, ejection fraction (EF), regional wall motion abnormalities, and outcome were first assessed only by echocardiographic measures, and then by 13 algorithms using a different hierarchy of imaging modalities and their quality. The median ESVI and EF were 78.0 (range: 22.8-283.8) mL/m2 and 28.0%, respectively. Hazard ratios comparing the randomized arms by subgroups of LVESVI and LVEF measured by echocardiography found that patients with smaller ventricles (LVESVI <60 mL/m2) and better LVEF (≥33%) may have benefitted by SVR, while those with larger ventricles (LVESVI >90 mL/m(2)) and lower LVEF (≤25%) did worse with SVR. Algorithms using all three imaging modalities found a weaker relationship between LV global function and the effects of SVR. The extent of regional wall motion abnormality did not influence the effects of SVR.ConclusionsSubgroup analyses of the STICH trial suggest that patients with less dilated LV and better LVEF may benefit from SVR, while those with larger LV and poorer LVEF may do worse. Clinical Trial Registration #: NCT00023595.
| S-EPMC3533917 | biostudies-literature