Impact of Complete Revascularization in the ISCHEMIA Trial

2023 ACC/AHA Chronic Coronary Disease Guideline - An opportunity to reestablish coronary artery bypass recommendations

Coronary artery bypass (CABG) has evolved over the decades, supported by scientific evidence from robust studies. The downgrade of the recommendation for CABG in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease proposed by the 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization and the 2023 ACC/AHA Chronic Coronary Disease Guidelines has brought this discussion to the fore, with prestigious cardiothoracic surgery societies such as AATS and STS not supporting these recommendations. The purpose of this article is to broaden this discussion in light of published studies.

Complete Coronary Revascularization and Outcomes in Patients Who Underwent Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Insights from The REGROUP Trial

There is growing evidence in support of coronary complete revascularization (CR). Nonetheless, there is no universally accepted definition of CR in patients who undergo coronary bypass grafting surgery (CABG). We sought to investigate the outcomes of CR, defined as surgical revascularization of any territory supplied by a suitable coronary artery with ≥50% stenosis. We performed a preplanned subanalysis in the Randomized Trial of Endoscopic or Open Saphenous Vein Graft Harvesting (REGROUP) clinical trial cohort. Of 1,147 patients who underwent CABG, 810 (70.6%) received CR. The primary outcome was a composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization over a median 4.7 years of follow-up. MACE occurred in 175 patients (21.6%) in the CR group and 86 patients (25.5%) in the incomplete revascularization (IR) group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67 to 1.13, p = 0.29). A total of 97 patients (12.0%) in the CR group and 48 patients (14.2%) in the IR group died (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.32, p = 0.67); nonfatal myocardial infarction occurred in 49 patients (6.0%) in the CR group and 30 patients (8.9%) in the IR group (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.2, p = 0.24), and repeat revascularization occurred in 62 patients (7.7%) in the CR group and 39 patients (11.6%) in the IR group (HR 0.64; 95% CI 0.42 to 0.95, p = 0.027). In conclusion, in patients with a great burden of co-morbidities who underwent CABG in the REGROUP trial over a median follow-up period of a median 4.7 years, CR was associated with similar MACE rates but a reduced risk of repeat revascularization. Longer-term follow-up is warranted.

Impact of Incomplete Revascularization After PCI in Left Main Disease: The EXCEL Trial

BACKGROUND

The importance of complete revascularization after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with left main coronary artery disease is uncertain. We investigated the clinical impact of complete revascularization in patients with left main coronary artery disease undergoing PCI in the EXCEL trial (Evaluation of XIENCE Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization).

METHODS

Composite rates of death or myocardial infarction (MI) following PCI during 5-year follow-up were examined in 903 patients based on core laboratory definitions of anatomic and functional complete revascularization, residual SYNTAX score (The Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery), and residual Jeopardy Score (rJS).

RESULTS

The risk of death or MI did not vary based on anatomic, functional, or residual SYNTAX score complete revascularization but did differ according to the rJS (5-year rates 17.6%, 19.5%, and 38.9% with rJS 0, 2, and ≥4, respectively; P=0.006). The higher rate of death or MI with rJS≥4 versus rJS≤2 was driven conjointly by increased mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.29 [95% CI, 1.11-4.71]; P=0.02) and spontaneous MI (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.89 [95% CI, 1.17-7.17]; P=0.02). The most common location for untreated severe stenoses in the rJS≥4 group was the left circumflex artery (LCX), and the post-PCI absence, compared with the presence, of any untreated lesion with diameter stenosis ≥70% in the LCX was associated with reduced 5-year rates of death or MI (18.9% versus 35.2%; hazard ratio, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.32-0.74]; P<0.001). The risk was the highest for residual ostial/proximal LCX lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients undergoing PCI in EXCEL trial, incomplete revascularization according to the rJS was associated with increased rates of death and spontaneous MI. Post-PCI untreated high-grade lesions in the LCX (especially the ostial/proximal LCX) drove these outcomes.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01205776.

A non-interventional cardiologist's guide to coronary chronic total occlusions

Coronary chronic total occlusions (CTO) are present in up to one-third of patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). It is thus essential for all clinical cardiologists to possess a basic awareness and understanding of CTOs, including optimal evaluation and management. While percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for CTO lesions has many similarities to non-CTO PCI, there are important considerations pertaining to pre-procedural evaluation, interventional techniques, procedural complications, and post-procedure management and follow-up unique to patients undergoing this highly specialized intervention. Distinct from other existing topical reviews, the current manuscript focuses on key knowledge relevant to non-interventional cardiologists.

The Evolving Paradigm of Revascularization in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: from Recovery of Systolic Function to Protection Against Future Ischemic Events

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We aim to reevaluate how the assessment of myocardial viability can guide optimal treatment strategies for patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) based on a more contemporary understanding of the mechanism of benefit of revascularization.

RECENT FINDINGS

The assessment of viability in left ventricular (LV) segments with diminished contraction has been proposed as key to predict the benefit of revascularization and, therefore, as a requisite for the selection of patients to undergo this form of treatment. However, data from prospective trials have diverged from earlier retrospective studies. Traditional binary viability assessment may oversimplify ICM's complexity and the nuances of revascularization benefits. A conceptual shift from the traditional paradigm centered on the assessment of viability as a dichotomous variable to a more comprehensive approach encompassing a thorough understanding of ICM's complex pathophysiology and the salutary effect of revascularization in the prevention of myocardial infarction and ventricular arrhythmias is required.