Article

Coronary-Artery Bypass Surgery in Patients with Left Ventricular Dysfunction

Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
New England Journal of Medicine (Impact Factor: 54.42). 04/2011; 364(17):1607-16. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1100356
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The role of coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) in the treatment of patients with coronary artery disease and heart failure has not been clearly established.
Between 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.
The 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.
In 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.).

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Sinisa Gradinac, Aug 19, 2015
2 Followers
 · 
209 Views
  • Source
    • "Non-blinded optimal medical therapy control An open-label comparison of OMT to the investigational device is appropriate in circumstances where no device or surgical comparator exists , and a sham is not feasible or ethical. Examples include the Sudden Cardiac Death in Heart Failure Trial (SCD-HeFT) of conventional therapy versus amiodarone versus an implantable cardioverter defibrillator in patients with NYHA class II or III heart failure and a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of ≤35% [15] and the Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure (STICH) trial of medical therapy versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery in patients with heart failure, LVEF ≤35%, and coronary artery disease [16]. This approach can be used to evaluate a new device versus OMT or the incremental benefit of the new device when added to conventional best therapy. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Several features of cardiovascular devices raise considerations for clinical trial conduct. Prospective, randomized, controlled trials remain the highest quality evidence for safety and effectiveness assessments, but, for instance, blinding may be challenging. In order to avoid bias and not confound data interpretation, the use of objective endpoints and blinding patients, study staff, core labs, and clinical endpoint committees to treatment assignment are helpful approaches. Anticipation of potential bias should be considered and planned for prospectively in a cardiovascular device trial. Prospective, single-arm studies (often referred to as registry studies) can provide additional data in some cases. They are subject to selection bias even when carefully designed; thus, they are generally not acceptable as the sole basis for pre-market approval of high risk cardiovascular devices. However, they complement the evidence base and fill the gaps unanswered by randomized trials. Registry studies present device safety and effectiveness in day-to-day clinical practice settings and detect rare adverse events in the post-market period. No single research design will be appropriate for every cardiovascular device or target patient population. The type of trial, appropriate control group, and optimal length of follow-up will depend on the specific device, its potential clinical benefits, the target patient population and the existence (or lack) of effective therapies, and its anticipated risks. Continued efforts on the part of investigators, the device industry, and government regulators are needed to reach the optimal approach for evaluating the safety and performance of innovative devices for the treatment of cardiovascular disease.
    International Journal of Cardiology 05/2014; 175(1). DOI:10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.05.021 · 6.18 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "For patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy without severe symptoms who are eligible for coronary artery bypass grafting, one large international trial demonstrated no significant difference in all-cause mortality between medical therapy alone and medical therapy plus coronary artery bypass grafting [193]. There were significant differences in cardiovascular mortality and death or cardiovascular hospitalization favoring surgical revascularization [193]. For the SSA region where access to revascularization is limited, the focus should be on improving the quality of medical therapy for patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The heart failure syndrome has been recognized as a significant contributor to cardiovascular disease burden in sub-Saharan African for many decades. Seminal knowledge regarding heart failure in the region came from case reports and case series of the early 20th century which identified infectious, nutritional and idiopathic causes as the most common. With increasing urbanization, changes in lifestyle habits, and ageing of the population, the spectrum of causes of HF has also expanded resulting in a significant burden of both communicable and non-communicable etiologies. Heart failure is sub-Saharan Africa is notable for the range of etiologies that concurrently exist as well as the healthcare environment marked by limited resources, weak national healthcare systems and a paucity of national level data on disease trends. With the recent publication of the first and largest multinational prospective registry of acute heart failure in sub-Saharan Africa, it is timely to review the state of knowledge to date and describe the myriad forms of heart failure in the region. This review discusses several forms of heart failure that are common in sub-Saharan Africa [e.g., rheumatic heart disease, hypertensive heart disease, pericardial disease, various dilated cardiomyopathies, HIV cardiomyopathy, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, endomyocardial fibrosis, ischemic heart disease, cor pulmonale] and presents each form with regard to epidemiology, natural history, clinical characteristics, diagnostic considerations and therapies. Areas and approaches to fill the remaining gaps in knowledge are also offered herein highlighting the need for research that is driven by regional disease burden and needs.
    Current Cardiology Reviews 04/2013; 9(2). DOI:10.2174/1573403X11309020008
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We clinically evaluated the current indications for perioperative intraaortic balloon pumping (IABP) in high-risk patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Over the past 22 years, 196 CABG patients received perioperative IABP at our institution. We divided the 22 years into periods I–IV (earliest to latest) and investigated the annual changes in the indications for and mortality from IABP. In periods I and II, IABP was mainly employed for postoperative low-output syndrome (LOS) or perioperative myocardial infarction (PMI). The hospital mortality rate was 13.2%–18.5%. In period III, the mortality rate was markedly reduced by the use of preoperative scheduled IABP. In period IV, however, scheduled IABP was used less often for high-risk CABG, and IABP was mainly employed in patients having emergency CABG for acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The hospital mortality rate was reduced to 3.7%. In the last 2 years, 19 (65.5%) of 29 patients who received preoperative IABP had emergency CABG for ACS, while 27 high-risk CABG patients with poor left ventricular (LV) function or left main trunk (LMT) disease were treated successfully without scheduled IABP. There were no significant differences between the IABP and non-IABP patients in age, sex, number of bypasses, and aortic cross-clamp time. Because of improvements in anesthesia, operative techniques, perioperative management, and cardioplegic solutions, preoperative support with IABP is less often needed for high-risk CABG, except in patients undergoing emergency surgery for ACS.
    Journal of Artificial Organs 03/1999; 2(1):53-57. DOI:10.1007/BF01235525 · 1.39 Impact Factor
Show more