The STICH trial (Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure): mode-of-death results

Investigation of Myocardial Substrate for Sudden Arrhythmic Death in Coronary Artery Disease Without Acute Coronary Thrombosis or Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND

This cohort study aimed to evaluate the potential myocardial arrhythmic substrate in people with coronary artery disease who died from sudden arrhythmic death (SAD) without acute coronary thrombosis or myocardial infarction.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed histological analysis of the left ventricular free wall obtained at autopsy from decedents with ≥1 coronary artery and ≥75% area stenosis who died suddenly from either noncardiac causes (25 men, 23 women) or SAD (25 men, 25 women), matched for age and sex. Decedents with acute coronary thrombosis, myocardial infarction, or other myocardial abnormality were excluded. Decedents with either noncardiac death or SAD had similar height, weight, and heart weight. Decedents with SAD had higher cumulative area stenosis of coronary arteries (mean, 162% versus 134%; mean difference, 29% [95% CI, 1%-56%], P=0.042) and a higher proportion of decedents with SAD had diabetes (mean, 10% versus 0%; mean difference, 10% [95% CI, 2%-18%], P=0.025) and chronic, nonocclusive, organized coronary artery thrombus (mean, 16% versus 0%; mean difference, 16% [95% CI, 6%-26%], P=0.0040). Moreover, decedents with SAD had lower cardiomyocyte width (mean, 18.6 μm versus 19.6 μm; mean difference, 1.0 μm [95% CI, 0.2-1.8], P=0.014) and higher capillary length density (mean, 3618 mm/mm3 versus 3164 mm/mm3; mean difference, 453 mm/mm3 [95% CI, 210-697], P=0.0003) than decedents with noncardiac death.

CONCLUSIONS

SAD in people with coronary artery disease without acute coronary thrombosis or myocardial infarction was associated with greater coronary artery plaque burden and cardiomyocyte atrophy that may have contributed to myocardial substrate for arrhythmia.

Optimizing Revascularization in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: Comparative Evidence on the Benefits and Indications of CABG and PCI

Ischemic cardiomyopathy remains a leading cause of heart failure, yet the optimal revascularization approach for patients with reduced left ventricular function remains uncertain. This review synthesizes current evidence on coronary revascularization strategies, emphasizing real-world applicability and individualized treatment. It critically evaluates the benefits and limitations of coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG] and percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI], highlighting key knowledge gaps. Findings from the STICH trial demonstrate that CABG improves long-term survival despite an elevated early procedural risk, particularly in patients with extensive multivessel disease. In contrast, the REVIVED-BCIS2 trial suggests that PCI enhances quality of life but does not significantly reduce mortality compared to optimal medical therapy, making it a viable alternative for high-risk patients ineligible for surgery. This review underscores the role of advanced imaging techniques in myocardial viability assessment and emphasizes the importance of comprehensive risk stratification in guiding revascularization decisions. Special attention is given to managing high-risk patients unsuitable for CABG and the potential benefits of PCI in symptom relief despite uncertain survival benefits. A stepwise algorithm is proposed to assist clinicians in tailoring revascularization strategies, reinforcing the need for a multidisciplinary Heart Team approach to optimize outcomes.

Surgical Revascularization Decisions in Ischemia and Heart Failure

Coronary artery bypass grafting is the major modality of coronary revascularization in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy as it provides surgical collateralization of the coronary bed protecting the functional myocardium. Myocardial viability testing does not have an established role in the surgical evaluation. Concomitant surgical ventricular restoration does not improve symptoms or survival, though patients with large aneurysms and significant reduction in ventricular size could benefit. Correction of functional mitral regurgitation does not improve survival, and severe functional mitral regurgitation should be addressed via mitral valve replacement. Temporary mechanical circulatory support can be used as a bridge to recovery.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Heart Failure due to Coronary Artery Disease

The role of revascularization and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with acute coronary syndrome is well established. However, the incremental value of revascularization over guideline-directed medical therapy is controversial. Currently available data supports the use of PCI to improve angina and quality of life for chronic coronary disease and heart failure (HF). However, there is insufficient data to support revascularization with PCI to improve mortality, reduce cardiovascular events, or improve ejection fraction over medical therapy alone. Additional trials are necessary to identify HF patients who may benefit from revascularization, and the optimal revascularization strategy for this population.

Genome-wide association study meta-analysis provides insights into the etiology of heart failure and its subtypes

Heart failure (HF) is a major contributor to global morbidity and mortality. While distinct clinical subtypes, defined by etiology and left ventricular ejection fraction, are well recognized, their genetic determinants remain inadequately understood. In this study, we report a genome-wide association study of HF and its subtypes in a sample of 1.9 million individuals. A total of 153,174 individuals had HF, of whom 44,012 had a nonischemic etiology (ni-HF). A subset of patients with ni-HF were stratified based on left ventricular systolic function, where data were available, identifying 5,406 individuals with reduced ejection fraction and 3,841 with preserved ejection fraction. We identify 66 genetic loci associated with HF and its subtypes, 37 of which have not previously been reported. Using functionally informed gene prioritization methods, we predict effector genes for each identified locus, and map these to etiologic disease clusters through phenome-wide association analysis, network analysis and colocalization. Through heritability enrichment analysis, we highlight the role of extracardiac tissues in disease etiology. We then examine the differential associations of upstream risk factors with HF subtypes using Mendelian randomization. These findings extend our understanding of the mechanisms underlying HF etiology and may inform future approaches to prevention and treatment.

Optimization and Economic Impact of Expedited Minimally Invasive Parafascicular Surgery (MIPS) Protocol for Spontaneous Intraparenchymal Hemorrhage

Background Minimally invasive parafascicular surgery (MIPS) for evacuating intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) has proven to be an effective treatment compared to medical management. At our academic center, we have adopted a strategy of early surgery (<12 hours) and aimed to assess its impact on patients undergoing MIPS from an economic standpoint. This study introduces an innovative preoperative protocol to reduce costs and improve efficiency in the healthcare setting for patients undergoing ICH evacuation. Methods A retrospective review was conducted on patients who underwent MIPS for spontaneous ICH evacuation between 2014 and 2017. The patients were stratified into two groups: expedited versus control and early versus late operation. The expedited protocol involved using either computed tomography angiography (CTA) or a stereotactic head CT for guidance during the operation.  Results Nine patients were included in the expedited protocol group, where they were taken from the emergency department (ED) for CT and CTA, followed by a surgical decision, and then directly to the operating room (OR) from the imaging center. Nine patients were included in the control group, where they were taken from the ED for CT and CTA and returned to the ED, followed by a surgical decision, then to the imaging center for a stereotactic CTH for intraoperative navigation, and then to the OR. Additionally, eleven patients were in the early operation group, and seven were in the late operation group. The mean time from ED admission to surgery was 8.2 hours for the early operation group and 62.2 hours for the late operation group (p = 0.10). The control group had 38 preoperative scans, while the expedited group had 17. The mean preoperative imaging cost decreased from $2,039 in the control to $1,003 in the expedited group (p = 0.004). Similarly, the mean preoperative imaging cost was $2,061 for the late operation group and $1,162 for the early operation group, respectively (p = 0.02). There was a 15% decrease in the postoperative hospital stay cost per patient (p > 0.05). Conclusion Patients undergoing an expedited preoperative protocol and early surgery experienced a statistically significant reduction in preoperative costs and a shorter time between ED admission and surgery. The expedited protocol may provide economic relief for patients undergoing MIPS without compromising outcomes.

Efficacy of catheter ablation for ventricular tachycardia in ischemic cardiomyopathy patients without an ICD implantation

BACKGROUND

The implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) prevents sudden cardiac death in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM). Catheter ablation has been shown to effectively reduce ventricular tachycardia (VT) recurrence, yet its efficacy in patients without an ICD implantation remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate the outcomes of ablation for VT in patients with ICM without a backup ICD.

METHODS

Patients with ICM who received ablation for VT without an ICD implantation were included in this study. Ablation was guided by either activation mapping or substrate mapping. Endocardial ablation was the primary strategy; epicardial access was considered when endocardial ablation failed. The primary end point was VT recurrence during follow-up; secondary end points included cardiovascular rehospitalization, all-cause mortality, and a composite of these events.

RESULTS

A total of 114 patients were included, with the mean age of 58.2 ± 11.1 years, 102 of whom (89.5%) were male. Twelve patients (10.5%) underwent endo-epicardial ablation, whereas the rest received endocardial ablation. With a median follow-up of 53.8 months (24.8-84.2 months), VT recurred in 45 patients (39.5%), and 6 patients (5.3%) died, including 2 sudden cardiac deaths. The recurrence rate of VT was significantly lower in patients undergoing endo-epicardial ablation than in those with endocardial ablation only (8.3% vs 43.1%; log-rank P = .032). After multivariate adjustment, epicardial ablation remained associated with a reduced risk of VT recurrence (hazard ratio, 0.14; 95% confidential interval, 0.02-0.98; P = .048).

CONCLUSION

Patients with ICM undergoing VT ablation without a backup ICD experienced a notably low rate of arrhythmic death. Most recurrences proved nonlethal.

Imaging Advances in Heart Failure

This paper delves into the significance of imaging in the diagnosis, aetiology and therapeutic guidance of heart failure, aiming to facilitate early referral and improve patient outcomes. Imaging plays a crucial role not only in assessing left ventricular ejection fraction, but also in characterising the underlying cardiac abnormalities and reaching a specific diagnosis. By providing valuable data on cardiac structure, function and haemodynamics, imaging helps diagnose the condition, evaluate haemodynamic status and, consequently, identify the underlying pathophysiological phenotype, as well as stratifying the risk for outcomes. In this article, we provide a comprehensive exploration of these aspects.

Management of Myocardial Infarction and the Role of Cardiothoracic Surgery

Myocardial infarction (MI) is a leading cause of mortality globally and is predominantly attributed to coronary artery disease (CAD). MI is categorized as ST-elevation MI (STEMI) or non-ST-elevation MI (NSTEMI), each with distinct etiologies and treatment pathways. The goal in treatment for both is restoring blood flow back to the myocardium. STEMI, characterized by complete occlusion of a coronary artery, is managed urgently with reperfusion therapy, typically percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In contrast, NSTEMI involves a partial occlusion of a coronary artery and is treated with medical management, PCI, or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) depending on risk scores and clinical judgment. The Heart Team approach can assist in deciding which reperfusion technique would provide the greatest benefit to the patient and is especially useful in complicated cases. Despite advances in treatment, complications such as cardiogenic shock (CS) and ischemic heart failure (HF) remain significant. While percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is considered the primary treatment for MI, it is important to recognize the significance of cardiac surgery in treatment, especially when there is complex disease or MI-related complications. This comprehensive review analyzes the role of cardiac surgery in MI management, recognizing when it is useful, or not.

Ischaemic Cardiomyopathy Secondary to Asymptomatic Coronary Artery Disease: A Case Report

Ischaemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) represents a common complication of coronary artery disease (CAD). Ischaemia causes ventricular remodelling, leading to an irreversible loss of myocardial tissue and adequate contractility, primarily affecting the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). We present the case of a 46-year-old male known as hypertensive presented to the hospital with a five-week history of progressive exertional dyspnoea, bilateral lower limb oedema subsequently involving his scrotum and penis. He reported reduced oral intake and occasional palpitations but denied chest pain, cough, fever, or haemoptysis. He had no personal history of cardiac disease, recent travels, or recreational drug use. Notably, he consumed approximately 12 units of alcohol weekly and was a non-smoker. On admission, he was treated for new-onset heart failure, and initial investigations showed acute kidney injury, raised troponin, and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), and chest X-ray showed an enlarged heart size (cardiothoracic ratio (CTR), 0.56) with moderate right pleural effusion. Echocardiography revealed a severely dilated left ventricle with severely impaired systolic function (LVEF 16%), bi-atrial dilatation, borderline dilated right ventricle with impaired systolic function, and moderate tricuspid regurgitation. Cardiac MRI showed that the left ventricle was severely dilated with severely impaired systolic function with nonviable mid to apical inferior and inferoseptal transmural post-ischaemic scar with associated hypokinesia. Ischaemic cardiomyopathy may vary from asymptomatic to severely symptomatic, commonly when symptomatic patients will present with anginal chest pain and dyspnoea on exertion. In contrast, asymptomatic patients can sometimes have up to 80% of transient ischaemic events with no chest pain or associated symptoms. This case underscores the importance of considering asymptomatic coronary artery disease in clinical practice and highlights the need for novel interventions and markers for early ischemia detection.

REVIVED BCIS-2: update and key learnings

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review summarises the shifting paradigms in the treatment of ischemic left ventricular dysfunction, spotlighting the revascularization for ischemic ventricular dysfunction-British cardiovascular intervention society-2 (REVIVED-BCIS2) trial results and its impact on key therapeutic goals: survival, left ventricular function, arrhythmia prevention, quality of life and viability testing.

RECENT FINDINGS

The REVIVED-BCIS2 trial, and its subsequent sub studies highlighted that (PCI) does not provide additional benefits to optimal medical therapy in terms of improving survival, left ventricular (LV) function, arrhythmic risk or quality of life. Additionally, viability testing did not differentiate patients who could benefit from PCI, although scar burden was found to be a significant predictor of outcome in these patients.

SUMMARY

The outcomes of REVIVED have challenged multiple existing beliefs in the field of ischaemic left ventricular dysfunction management, emphasising the importance of investigating evidence free areas in our practice. Future work, including the STICH3 international consortium of trials, aims to answer some of the remaining unanswered questions.

Clinical Updates in Coronary Artery Disease: A Comprehensive Review

Despite significant goals achieved in diagnosis and treatment in recent decades, coronary artery disease (CAD) remains a high mortality entity and continues to pose substantial challenges to healthcare systems globally. After the latest guidelines, novel data have emerged and have not been yet considered for routine practice. The scope of this review is to go beyond the guidelines, providing insights into the most recent clinical updates in CAD, focusing on non-invasive diagnostic techniques, risk stratification, medical management and interventional therapies in the acute and stable scenarios. Highlighting and synthesizing the latest developments in these areas, this review aims to contribute to the understanding and management of CAD helping healthcare providers worldwide.

Myocardial work in patients with heart failure and ischemic cardiomyopathy according to the mode of coronary revascularization

BACKGROUND

The association of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) on myocardial function, as reflected in myocardial work (MyW) parameters, in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and heart failure (HF) is unknown.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 68 patients who were hospitalized with chronic HF due to ischemic cardiomyopathy and stratified them according to the mode of revascularization. All patients underwent a 2D speckle tracking echocardiography exam performed by the same expert sonographer and had complete MyW data including global work index (GWI), global constructive work (GCW), global wasted work (GWW), and global work efficiency (GWE).

RESULTS

The mean age of patients was 70 ± 10 years and 86.8% were men. The mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in overall cohort was 31.6 ± 9.5%. Both subgroups did not significantly differ in terms of baseline LVEF, comorbidities, and pharmacotherapy. Compared with those who received PCI, patients revascularized with CABG had significantly greater GWI (821 vs. 555 mmHg%, p = 0.002), GCW (1101 vs. 794 mmHg%, p = 0.001), GWE (78 vs. 72.6%, p = 0.025), and global longitudinal strain (-8.7 vs. -6.7%, p = 0.004). Both patient subgroups did not significantly differ with respect to GWW (273 vs. 245 mmHg%, p = 0.410 for CABG and PCI, respectively) and survival during the median follow-up of 18 months (log-rank p = 0.813).

CONCLUSION

Patients with HF and ischemic cardiomyopathy revascularized with CABG had greater myocardial work performance when compared with those revascularized with PCI. This might suggest a higher degree of functional myocardial revascularization associated with the CABG procedure.

An Updated Review of the Management of Chronic Heart Failure in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is common in patients with heart failure (HF) and is associated with high morbidity and mortality. There has been remarkable progress in the treatment of HF over recent years with the establishment of guideline-directed medical therapies including: (1) Beta-blockers, (2) renal angiotensin aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibition (i.e., angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor [ACEi], aldosterone receptor blocker [ARB] or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor [ARNI]); (3) mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA), and (4) sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i). However, there are challenges to the implementation of these medications in patients with concomitant CKD due to increased vulnerability to common side-effects (including worsening renal function, hyperkalaemia, hypotension), and most of the pivotal trials which provide evidence of the efficacy of these medications excluded patients with severe CKD. Patients with CKD and HF often have regular healthcare encounters with multiple professionals and can receive conflicting guidance regarding their medication. Thus, despite being at higher risk of adverse cardiovascular events, patients who have both HF and CKD are more likely to be under-optimised on evidence-based therapies. This review is an updated summary of the evidence available for the management of HF (including reduced, mildly reduced and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction) in patients with various stages of CKD. The review covers the evidence for recommended medications, devices such as implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), intravenous (IV) iron, and discusses how frailty affects the management of these patients. It also considers emerging evidence for the prevention of HF in the cohort of patients with CKD. It synthesises the available evidence regarding when to temporarily stop, continue or rechallenge medications in this cohort. Chronic HF in context of CKD remains a challenging scenario for clinicians to manage, which is usually complicated by frailty, multimorbidity and polypharmacy. Treatment should be tailored to a patients individual needs and management in specialised cardio-renal clinics with a multi-disciplinary team approach has been recommended. This review offers a concise summary on this expansive topic.

Myocardial viability on trial

The concept of myocardial viability is usually referred to areas of the myocardium, which show contractile dysfunction at rest and in which contractility is expected to improve after revascularization. The traditional paradigm states that an improvement in function after revascularization leads to improved health outcomes and that assessment of myocardial viability in patients with ischaemic left ventricular dysfunction (ILVD) is a prerequisite for clinical decisions regarding treatment. A range of retrospective observational studies supported this 'viability hypothesis'. However, data from prospective trials have diverged from earlier retrospective studies and challenge this hypothesis. Traditional binary viability assessment may oversimplify ILVD's complexity and the nuances of revascularization benefits. A conceptual shift from the traditional paradigm centred on the assessment of viability as a dichotomous variable to a more comprehensive approach encompassing a thorough understanding of ILVD's complex pathophysiology and the salutary effect of revascularization in the prevention of myocardial infarction and ventricular arrhythmias is required.

A treatment algorithm for ischemic cardiomyopathy

Treatment of ischemic cardiomyopathy has been the focus of increased attention by cardiologists due to recent evidence of an important outcome study comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) plus optimal medical treatment vs optimal medical treatment alone, concluding for the futility of myocardial revascularization by PCI. A relatively older trial of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in the same condition, on the other hand, had concluded for some prognostic improvement at a long-term follow-up. This short manuscript addresses how to triage such patients, frequently encountered in medical practice and considering clinical presentation, imaging results, and surgical risk, to provide practical guidance to treatment.

Use of sacubitril/valsartan early after CABG

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) remains a major public health problem with a high mortality and morbidity worldwide. Currently, there is no optimal revascularisation strategy for patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy despite suggestions that coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) may be superior to medical therapy in improving survival. However, CABG may be associated with substantial risk in HF subjects. We therefore aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the early initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in haemodynamically stabilised patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) after early CABG.

METHODS

This was an open-label study in which ~80 patients after CABG were randomised either to the early or late initiation of the sacubitril-valsartan. The study included patients >40 years with left ventricular ejection fraction <45% and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II-IV at the early stage after CABG. Patients underwent intervention, the starting dose of sacubitril/valsartan (24/26 mg or 49/51 mg two times per day). The follow-up took place every 4 weeks except the first visit, which took place in 2 weeks after initiation. The primary endpoint assessed the key safety outcomes, the secondary endpoints were: the quality of life measured, the N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) changes and 6 min walk test (6MWT).

RESULTS

In total, 83 patients were screened and 77 patients were enrolled. The majority of patients (84.4%) were in the NYHA class III at randomisation. The number of patients who discontinued the study was low in both groups (2.5%, 5.2%), and renal function, hyperkalaemia and symptomatic hypotension rarely seen in both groups did not differ significantly. The improvement in quality of life and distance at the 6MWT in both groups was significant (p<0.001). The NT-proBNP concentration decreased in both groups, the significant reduction was in the early group (p<0.001) versus the postdischarge group.

CONCLUSIONS

The early initiation of sacubitril/valsartan in patients after CABG with HFrEF is safe and effective. Adverse events and permanent discontinuation were low. The NT-proBNP concentration reduced significantly with the early in-hospital initiation.

Appropriate time for ejection fraction reassessment after revascularization in patients with left ventricular dysfunction for risk stratification of sudden cardiac death

BACKGROUND

Appropriate time for ejection fraction (EF) reassessment after revascularization in patients with left ventricular dysfunction has not been investigated comprehensively, although 3 months after revascularization is recommended to stratify the risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD).

HYPOTHESIS

EF reassessed within different timeframe after revascularization may have incosistent contribution for risk stratification of SCD.

METHODS

Patients who had EF ≤ 40% before revascularization and had EF reassessment at least once during follow-up were included. The role of early (<3 months) versus late (3-12 months) EF measurements in prediction of all-cause mortality and SCD were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 1589 patients were identified. EF reassessed <3 months was lower than EF reassessed within 3-12 months (42.1 ± 9.7% vs. 45.8 ± 10.8%; p < .01). Among 1069 patients who had EF reassessed <3 months, EF ≤ 35% was associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22-2.29; p < .01), but had no association with the risk of SCD (HR, 1.44; 95% CI, 0.84-2.48; p = .18). By contrast, among 595 patients who had EF reassessed within 3-12 months, EF ≤ 35% was associated with higher risks of both all-cause death (HR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.06-3.10; p = .03) and SCD (HR, 2.71; 95% CI, 1.31-5.61; p < .01). The relative contribution of SCD to all-cause death was higher in patients with EF ≤ 35% than patients with EF > 35% when EF was reassessed within 3-12 months (p = .04). However, when EF was reassessed <3 months, the mode of death was similar in patients with EF ≤ 35% versus >35% (p = .85).

CONCLUSIONS

3 to 12 months after revascularization may be appropriate for cardiac function reassessment and SCD risk stratification.

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.

Extreme Risk of Sudden Cardiac Death within Three Months after Revascularization in Patients with Ischemic Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction

Background

The risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) after coronary revascularization in patients with left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction has not been characterized completely. This study aims to evaluate the incidence and time course of SCD after revascularization in such patients. The determinants of SCD within 3 months after revascularization were also assessed.

Methods

A cohort study of patients with reduced ejection fraction (EF ≤ 40%), who underwent revascularization was performed. The incidence of SCD was estimated to account for the competing risk of deaths due to other causes.

Results

2317 patients were enrolled. With a median follow-up of 3.5 years, 162 (32.1%) of the 504 deaths were due to SCD. The risk of SCD was highest in the first 3 months after revascularization, with an incidence rate of 0.37%/month. The event rate decreased to 0.12%/month, 0.08%/month, 0.09%/month, 0.14%/month, and 0.19%/month at 3-6 months, 6-12 months, 1-3 years, 3-5 years, and 5-10 years, respectively. A history of ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (hazard ratio [HR], 5.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.33-23.19; p = 0.019) and triple vessel disease (HR, 3.90; 95% CI, 1.38-11.05; p = 0.010) were associated with the risk of SCD within 3 months. However, preoperative EF (in 5% increments) was not predictive (HR per 5% increase, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.62-1.55; p = 0.935).

Conclusions

For patients with LV dysfunction, the risk of SCD was the highest during the first 3 months after revascularization. Further risk classification and treatment strategy are warranted.

Clinical Trial Registration

The name of the registry: Coronary Revascularization in Patients with Ischemic Heart Failure and Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death. Registration number: ChiCTR2100044378.

Arrhythmia and Death Following Percutaneous Revascularization in Ischemic Left Ventricular Dysfunction: Prespecified Analyses From the REVIVED-BCIS2 Trial

BACKGROUND

Ventricular arrhythmia is an important cause of mortality in patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. Revascularization with coronary artery bypass graft or percutaneous coronary intervention is often recommended for these patients before implantation of a cardiac defibrillator because it is assumed that this may reduce the incidence of fatal and potentially fatal ventricular arrhythmias, although this premise has not been evaluated in a randomized trial to date.

METHODS

Patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction, extensive coronary disease, and viable myocardium were randomly assigned to receive either percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) plus optimal medical and device therapy (OMT) or OMT alone. The composite primary outcome was all-cause death or aborted sudden death (defined as an appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy or a resuscitated cardiac arrest) at a minimum of 24 months, analyzed as time to first event on an intention-to-treat basis. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular death or aborted sudden death, appropriate implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy or sustained ventricular arrhythmia, and number of appropriate ICD therapies.

RESULTS

Between August 28, 2013, and March 19, 2020, 700 patients were enrolled across 40 centers in the United Kingdom. A total of 347 patients were assigned to the PCI+OMT group and 353 to the OMT alone group. The mean age of participants was 69 years; 88% were male; 56% had hypertension; 41% had diabetes; and 53% had a clinical history of myocardial infarction. The median left ventricular ejection fraction was 28%; 53.1% had an implantable defibrillator inserted before randomization or during follow-up. All-cause death or aborted sudden death occurred in 144 patients (41.6%) in the PCI group and 142 patients (40.2%) in the OMT group (hazard ratio, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.82-1.30]; P=0.80). There was no between-group difference in the occurrence of any of the secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

PCI was not associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality or aborted sudden death. In patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, PCI is not beneficial solely for the purpose of reducing potentially fatal ventricular arrhythmias.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov; Unique identifier: NCT01920048.

Characterization of the substernal space with computed tomography imaging in patients with and without median sternotomy: Assessing a novel implant location for extravascular defibrillation lead placement

BACKGROUND

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) provide clinically significant therapy for the prevention of sudden cardiac death. This study aimed to characterize the substernal space using computed tomography (CT) in patients with and without prior midline sternotomy to investigate the feasibility of substernal ICD lead implantation in post-sternotomy patients.

METHODS

High-quality electrocardiogram-gated CT images from 100 patients (71% male, average body mass index 23.5 ± 2.9) were retrospectively collected, including 50 patients with prior midline sternotomy (S-group) and 50 patients with no prior sternotomy (NS-group). Distances were measured from the retrosternal surface to the epicardial surface of the heart and segmented into four regions from the xiphoid tip and superiorly along the sternum.

RESULTS

Results generally showed a measurable but narrower average sternum-to-heart distance in the prior sternotomy group compared to the non-sternotomy group in all four regions (p < .05). In the S-group, the sternum-to-heart distances across all regions ranged from 0 to 32.0 mm, while in the NS-group, the distances ranged from 0 to 39.9 mm.

CONCLUSION

Small but measurable separations between the heart and sternum were observed in patients with prior sternotomy, particularly near the xiphoid region, indicating the potential viability of extravascular substernal ICD lead implantation in post-sternotomy patients.

Revascularisation for Ischaemic Cardiomyopathy

Coronary artery disease is a leading cause of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Coronary artery bypass grafting appears to provide clinical benefits such as improvements in quality of life, reductions in readmissions and MI, and favourable effects on long-term mortality; however, there is a significant short-term procedural risk when left ventricular function is severely impaired, which poses a conundrum for many patients. Could percutaneous coronary intervention provide the same benefits without the hazard of surgery? There have been no randomised studies to support this practice until recently. The REVIVED-BCIS2 trial (NCT01920048) assessed the outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention in addition to optimal medical therapy in patients with ischaemic left ventricular dysfunction and stable coronary artery disease. This review examines the trial results in detail, suggests a pathway for investigation and revascularisation in ischaemic cardiomyopathy, and explores some of the remaining unanswered questions.

Classification of Heart Failure Events by Severity: Insights From the VICTORIA Trial

BACKGROUND

Hospitalization due to heart failure (HFH) is a major source of morbidity, consumes significant economic resources and is a key endpoint in HF clinical trials. HFH events vary in severity and implications, but they are typically considered equivalent when analyzing clinical trial outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the frequency and severity of HF events, assess treatment effects and describe differences in outcomes by type of HF event in VICTORIA (Vericiguat Global Study in Subjects with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction).

METHODS

VICTORIA compared vericiguat with placebo in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (< 45%) and a recent worsening HF event. All HFHs were prospectively adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee (CEC) whose members were blinded to treatment assignment. We evaluated the frequency and clinical impact of HF events by severity, categorized by highest intensity of HF treatment (urgent outpatient visit or hospitalization treated with oral diuretics, intravenous diuretics, intravenous vasodilators, intravenous inotropes, or mechanical support) and treatment effect by event categories.

RESULTS

In VICTORIA, 2948 HF events occurred in 5050 enrolled patients. Overall total CEC HF events for vericiguat vs placebo were 43.9 vs 49.1 events/100 patient-years (P = 0.01). Hospitalization for intravenous diuretics was the most common type of HFH event (54%). HF event types differed markedly in their clinical implications for both in-hospital and post-discharge events. We observed no difference in the distribution of HF events between randomized treatment groups (P = 0.78).

CONCLUSION

HF events in large global trials vary significantly in severity and clinical implications, which may have implications for more nuanced trial design and interpretation.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02861534).

Coronary revascularization for heart failure with coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

AIMS

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a common cause of heart failure (HF). Whether coronary revascularization improves outcomes in patients with HF receiving guideline-recommended pharmacological therapy (GRPT) remains uncertain; therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We searched in public databases for RCTs published between 1 January 2001 and 22 November 2022, investigating the effects of coronary revascularization on morbidity and mortality in patients with chronic HF due to CAD. All-cause mortality was the primary outcome. We included five RCTs that enrolled, altogether, 2842 patients (most aged <65 years; 85% men; 67% with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%). Overall, compared to medical therapy alone, coronary revascularization was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.99; p = 0.0278) and cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.70-0.93; p = 0.0024) but not the composite of hospitalization for HF or all-cause mortality (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.74-1.01; p = 0.0728). There were insufficient data to show whether the effects of coronary artery bypass graft surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention were similar or differed.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with chronic HF and CAD enrolled in RCTs, the effect of coronary revascularization on all-cause mortality was statistically significant but neither substantial (HR 0.88) nor robust (upper 95% CI close to 1.0). RCTs were not blinded, which may bias reporting of the cause-specific reasons for hospitalization and mortality. Further trials are required to determine which patients with HF and CAD obtain a substantial benefit from coronary revascularization by either coronary artery bypass graft surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention.

Clinical Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease

Ischemic heart disease is considered stable, if patients are asymptomatic or have well controlled symptoms. Based on the pretest probability, noninvasive imaging tests are performed to rule out the disease, and coronary computed tomography angiography being the first line. Invasive coronary angiography remains the gold standard method for diagnosing coronary artery disease. In patients with stable coronary artery disease, comorbidities such as hyperlipidemia, hypertension, and diabetes should be optimized. For patients with persistent anginal symptoms even with optimized medical therapy, coronary revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention can be considered. Coronary artery bypass grafting may be more beneficial for patients who has stable coronary artery disease with left main disease and/or left ventricular dysfunction and/or multivessel disease; however, treatment should be individualized to the overall clinical picture.

Myocardial Revascularization in Patients With Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: For Whom and How

Background Myocardial revascularization has been advocated to improve myocardial function and prognosis in ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM). We discuss the evidence for revascularization in patients with ICM and the role of ischemia and viability detection in guiding treatment. Methods and Results We searched for randomized controlled trials evaluating the prognostic impact of revascularization in ICM and the value of viability imaging for patient management. Out of 1397 publications, 4 randomized controlled trials were included, enrolling 2480 patients. Three trials (HEART [Heart Failure Revascularisation Trial], STICH [Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure], and REVIVED [REVascularization for Ischemic VEntricular Dysfunction]-BCIS2) randomized patients to revascularization or optimal medical therapy. HEART was stopped prematurely without showing any significant difference between treatment strategies. STICH showed a 16% lower mortality with bypass surgery compared with optimal medical therapy at a median follow-up of 9.8 years. However, neither the presence/extent of left ventricle viability nor ischemia interacted with treatment outcomes. REVIVED-BCIS2 showed no difference in the primary end point between percutaneous revascularization or optimal medical therapy. PARR-2 (Positron Emission Tomography and Recovery Following Revascularization) randomized patients to imaging-guided revascularization versus standard care, with neutral results overall. Information regarding the consistency of patient management with viability testing results was available in ≈65% of patients (n=1623). No difference in survival was revealed according to adherence or no adherence to viability imaging. Conclusions In ICM, the largest randomized controlled trial, STICH, suggests that surgical revascularization improves patients' prognosis at long-term follow-up, whereas evidence supports no benefit of percutaneous coronary intervention. Data from randomized controlled trials do not support myocardial ischemia or viability testing for treatment guidance. We propose an algorithm for the workup of patients with ICM considering clinical presentation, imaging results, and surgical risk.

Myocardial Viability Testing in the Management of Ischemic Heart Failure

Although major advances have occurred lately in medical therapy, ischemic heart failure remains an important cause of death and disability. Viable myocardium represents a cause of reversible ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. Coronary revascularization may improve left ventricular function and prognosis in patients with viable myocardium. Although patients with impaired left ventricular function and multi-vessel coronary artery disease benefit the most from revascularization, they are at high risk of complications related to revascularization procedure. An important element in selecting the patients for myocardial revascularization is the presence of the viable myocardium. Multiple imaging modalities can assess myocardial viability and predict functional improvement after revascularization, with dobutamine stress echocardiography, nuclear imaging tests and magnetic resonance imaging being the most frequently used. However, the role of myocardial viability testing in the management of patients with ischemic heart failure is still controversial due to the failure of randomized controlled trials of revascularization to reveal clear benefits of viability testing. This review summarizes the current knowledge regarding the concept of viable myocardium, depicts the role and tools for viability testing, discusses the research involving this topic and the controversies related to the utility of myocardial viability testing and provides a patient-centered approach for clinical practice.

Future scope and challenges for congestive heart failure: Moving towards development of pharmacotherapy

Heart failure is invariably associated with cardiac hypertrophy and impaired cardiac performance. Although several drugs have been developed to delay the progression of heart failure, none of the existing interventions have shown beneficial effects in reducing morbidity and mortality. In order to determine specific targets for future drug development, we have discussed different mechanisms involving both cardiomyocytes and non-myocyte (extracellular matrix) alterations for the transition of cardiac hypertrophy to heart failure as well as for the progression of heart failure. We have emphasized the role of oxidative stress, inflammatory cytokines, metabolic alterations and Ca2+-handling defects in adverse cardiac remodeling and heart dysfunction in hypertrophied myocardium. Alterations in the regulatory process due to several protein kinases as well as participation of mitochondrial Ca2+-overload, activation of proteases and phospholipases and changes in gene expression for subcellular remodeling have also been described for the occurrence of cardiac dysfunction. Association of cardiac arrhythmia with heart failure has been explained as a consequence of catecholamine oxidation products. Since these multifactorial defects in extracellular matrix and cardiomyocytes are evident in the failing heart, it is a challenge for experimental cardiologists to develop appropriate combination drug therapy for improving cardiac function in heart failure.

Nuclear cardiology for a cardiothoracic surgeon

Cardiac surgeons are commonly faced with issues regarding the balance between the potential risk and the potential benefit of a surgical procedure. Nuclear cardiology procedures such as single-photon emission computed tomography and positron emission tomography provide the surgeon with objective information that augments standard clinical and angiographic assessments related to the diagnosis, prognosis, and potential benefit from any intervention. Myocardial perfusion is imaged with the use of radiopharmaceuticals that accumulate rapidly in the myocardium in proportion to the myocardial blood flow. Radionuclide lung imaging most commonly involves the demonstration of pulmonary perfusion using technetium-99 m macro aggregate albumin (Tc-99 m MAA), as well as the assessment of ventilation using inspired inert gas, usually xenon, or Tc-99 m-labelled aerosols. Nuclear cardiology is extensively used as a part of the work-up of ischemic heart disease and cardiac failure in deciding the optimal therapeutic strategy with its ability to predict the severity of the disease. It has also proved extremely useful in the management of congenital heart disease and the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism, among many other applications. Myocardial perfusion imaging is a basic adjunct to the noninvasive assessment of patients with stable angina, baseline electrocardiogram (ECG) abnormalities, post-revascularisation assessment, and heart failure. This review article covers a summary of basic concepts of nuclear cardiology about what a cardiac surgeon should be aware of. To many, it is just a perfusion test, but the versatility, reliability, and future of the technology are without a doubt.

2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The guideline for coronary artery revascularization replaces the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines, providing a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered.

STRUCTURE

Coronary artery disease remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Coronary revascularization is an important therapeutic option when managing patients with coronary artery disease. The 2021 coronary artery revascularization guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with coronary artery disease who are being considered for coronary revascularization, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests.

Myocardial viability testing: all STICHed up, or about to be REVIVED?

Patients with ischaemic left ventricular dysfunction frequently undergo myocardial viability testing. The historical model presumes that those who have extensive areas of dysfunctional-yet-viable myocardium derive particular benefit from revascularization, whilst those without extensive viability do not. These suppositions rely on the theory of hibernation and are based on data of low quality: taking a dogmatic approach may therefore lead to patients being refused appropriate, prognostically important treatment. Recent data from a sub-study of the randomized STICH trial challenges these historical concepts, as the volume of viable myocardium failed to predict the effectiveness of coronary artery bypass grafting. Should the Heart Team now abandon viability testing, or are new paradigms needed in the way we interpret viability? This state-of-the-art review critically examines the evidence base for viability testing, focusing in particular on the presumed interactions between viability, functional recovery, revascularization and prognosis which underly the traditional model. We consider whether viability should relate solely to dysfunctional myocardium or be considered more broadly and explore wider uses of viability testingoutside of revascularization decision-making. Finally, we look forward to ongoing and future randomized trials, which will shape evidence-based clinical practice in the future.

Improvement of left ventricular function with surgical revascularization in patients eligible for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator

INTRODUCTION

Left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) ≤ 35% is the cornerstone criterion for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) eligibility. Improvement in EF may occur in ICD-eligible patients after coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). However, the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of this process are unclear.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We studied 427 patients with EF ≤ 35% who underwent CABG in the Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure (STICH) trial and had a systematic pre- and postoperative (4 months) EF assessment using the identical cardiac imaging modality. All imaging studies were interpreted at a core laboratory. Improvement in EF was defined as postoperative EF > 35% and >5% absolute improvement from baseline. Of the 427 patients (mean age 61.8 ± 9.5 and 50 women), 125 (29.2%) had EF improvement. Their mean EF increased from 26.8% (±5.8%) to 43.3% (±6.5%) (p < .0001). EF improvement occurred in only 20% of patients with a preoperative EF < 25%. The odds of EF improvement were 1.96 times higher (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.91-4.23, p = .09) in patients with myocardial viability. In adjusted analyses, EF improvement was associated with a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.35-0.96; p = .03) and heart failure mortality (HR: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.11-0.87; p = .027).

CONCLUSION

Nearly 1/3rd of ICD-eligible patients undergoing CABG had significant improvement in EF, obviating the need for primary prevention ICD implantation. These results provide patients and clinicians data on the likelihood of ICD eligibility after CABG and support the practice of reassessment of EF after revascularization.

What causes sudden death in patients with chronic heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction?

Sudden death characterizes the mode of demise in 30–50% of patients with chronic heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction. Occasionally, these events have an identifiable pathophysiological trigger, e.g. myocardial infarction, catecholamine surges, or electrolyte imbalances, but in most circumstances, there is no acute precipitating mechanism. Instead, adverse left ventricular remodelling and fibrosis creates an exceptionally fragile and highly vulnerable substrate, which can be characterized using the model developed in theoretical physics of ‘self-organizing criticality’. This framework has been applied to describe the genesis of avalanches, nodes of traffic congestion unrelated to an accident, the abrupt system-wide failure of electrical grids, and the initiation of cancer and neurodegenerative diseases. Self-organizing criticality within the ventricular myocardium relies on complex adaptations to progressive stress and stretch, which evolve inevitably to an abrupt end (termed ‘cascading failure’), even though the rate of deterioration of the underlying disease process has not changed. The result is acute circulatory collapse (i.e. sudden death) in the absence of an identifiable triggering event. Cascading failure in a severely remodelled or fibrotic heart can become manifest electrically as a first-time ventricular tachyarrhythmia that is responsive to the shock delivered by an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). Alternatively, it may present as an acute mechanical failure, which is manifest as (i) asystole, bradyarrhythmia, or electromechanical dissociation; or (ii) incessant ventricular fibrillation that persists despite repetitive ICD discharges; in both instances, the sudden deaths cannot be prevented by an ICD. This conceptual framework explains why anti-remodelling and antifibrotic interventions (i.e. neurohormonal antagonists and cardiac resynchronization) reduce the risk of sudden death in patients with heart failure in the absence of an ICD and provide incremental benefits in those with an ICD. The adoption of anti-remodelling and antifibrotic treatments may explain why the incidence of sudden death in clinical trials of heart failure has declined dramatically over the past 10–15 years, independent of the use of ICDs.

Coronary revascularisation in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy

Heart failure resulting from ischaemic heart disease is associated with a poor prognosis despite optimal medical treatment. Despite this, patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy have been largely excluded from randomised trials of revascularisation in stable coronary artery disease. Revascularisation has multiple potential mechanisms of benefit, including the reversal of myocardial hibernation, suppression of ventricular arrhythmias and prevention of spontaneous myocardial infarction. Coronary artery bypass grafting is considered the first-line mode of revascularisation in these patients; however, evidence from the Surgical Treatment of Ischaemic Heart Failure (STICH) trial showed a reduction in mortality, though this only became apparent with extended follow-up due to an excess of early adverse events in the surgical arm. There is currently no randomised controlled trial evidence for percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy; however, the REVIVED-BCIS2 trial has recently completed recruitment and will address this gap in the evidence. Future directions include (1) clinical trials of revascularisation in patients hospitalised with heart failure, (2) defining the role of viability and ischaemia testing in heart failure, (3) studies to enhance the understanding of the mechanistic effects of revascularisation and (4) generating models to refine pre- and post-revascularisation risk prediction.

Impact of revascularization in patients with post-infarction left ventricular aneurysm and ventricular tachyarrhythmia

Background

Ventricular arrhythmia is a leading cause of cardiac death among patients with post‐infarction left ventricular aneurysm (PI‐LVA). The effect of coronary revascularization in PI‐LVA patients with ventricular tachyarrhythmia remains unknown. This study aims to investigate the impact of revascularization therapy on clinical outcomes in these patients.

Methods

A total of 238 PI‐LVA patients were enrolled, and 59 patients were presented with sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) or ventricular fibrillation (VF). Patients were classified into 4 groups by treatment strategies (medical or revascularization) and the presence of VT/VF: group 1 (n = 57): VT/VF− and revascularization−; group 2 (n = 122): VT/VF− and revascularization+; group 3 (n = 34): VT/VF+ and revascularization+; and group 4 (n = 25): VT/VF+ and revascularization‐. The clinical outcomes were compared, and the primary endpoint was cardiac death or heart transplantation.

Results

Patients were followed up for 45 ± 16 months, and 41 patients (17.2%) reached the primary endpoint. Kaplan–Meier analysis showed that in VT/VF− patients, revascularization associated with higher cardiac survival compared with medical therapy (log‐rank p = .002), but in VT/VF+ patients, revascularization did not predict better cardiac outcome (log‐rank p = .901). Cox regression analysis revealed PET‐EF (HR 4.41, 95% CI: 1.72–11.36, p = .002) and moderate/severe mitral regurgitation (HR 2.32, 95% CI: 1.02–5.30, p = .046) as independent predictors of adverse cardiac outcome in patients with VT/VF.

Conclusion

PI‐LVA patients with VT/VF are at high risk of adverse cardiac outcome, and coronary revascularization does not mitigate this risk, although revascularization was associated with higher cardiac survival in PI‐LVA patients without VT/VF.

Cancer Mortality in Trials of Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background The burden of cancer in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction is apparently growing. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) may help understanding this observation, since they span decades of heart failure treatment. Methods and Results We assessed cancer, cardiovascular, and total mortality in phase 3 heart failure RCTs involving ≥90% individuals with left ventricular ejection fraction <45%, who were not acutely decompensated and did not represent specific patient subsets. The pooled odds ratios (ORs) of each type of death for the control and treatment arms were calculated using a random-effects model. Temporal trends and the impact of patient and RCT characteristics on mortality outcomes were evaluated by meta-regression analysis. Cancer mortality was reported for 15 (25%) of 61 RCTs, including 33 709 subjects, and accounted for 6% to 14% of all deaths and 17% to 67% of noncardiovascular deaths. Cancer mortality rate was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.46-0.71) per 100 patient-years without temporal trend (P=0.35). Cardiovascular (P=0.001) and total (P=0.001) mortality rates instead decreased over time. Moreover, cancer mortality was not influenced by treatment (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.92-1.28), unlike cardiovascular (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79-0.98) and all-cause (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84-0.99) mortality. Meta-regression did not reveal significant sources of heterogeneity. Possible reasons for excluding patients with malignancy overlapped among RCTs with and without published cancer mortality, and malignancy was an exclusion criterion only for 4 (8.7%) of the RCTs not reporting cancer mortality. Conclusions Cancer is a major, yet overlooked cause of noncardiovascular death in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, which has become more prominent with cardiovascular mortality decline.

Cost to Save a Life in Heart Failure: Health Disparity Costs Lives

Objective The purpose of this paper is to assign a dollar value to life-saving medication, surgical procedures, and medical devices. The knowledge of the wide variation in the cost of drugs, surgery, and devices allows providers and patients to choose higher-valued therapies. Cost is a significant barrier to health. The current reimbursement system is complicated, representing a significant barrier to saving lives by promoting health disparity. Background The cost analysis of heart failure therapies is an important tool in the education of physicians, patients, and vendors of the intervention. The analysis demonstrates disparities between heart failure therapies. The cost to save a single life is calculated from annualized absolute mortality risk reduction, trial length, and estimated 10-year costs. The method allows comparisons of drugs, devices, and surgery. Methods The 10-year cost of drugs is 120 months times the cost of a drug/month as listed by the website GoodRX.com. The 10-year cost of surgery or device therapy was determined from a cost analysis found by a Google search of the literature. When wide ranges were reported, the mean value was selected. 1/absolute mortality risk reduction X 100 is the number needed to treat to save a life annualized for the mean length of the study. The cost to save a life can then be computed by the following formula: Cost/life saved = (10-year cost/annualized absolute mortality risk reduction) X (100) Results Beta-blockers and spironolactone had the lowest cost per life saved at $13,333 and $21,818, respectively. Defibrillators are the most expensive at $6,417,856. Valsartan/sacubitril has a cost of $1,127,733. Dapagliflozin, the newest class of heart failure drug, costs $4,853,200.  Conclusions Calculating the cost to save a life gives insight into the value of therapies and demonstrates disparities. It is a means of comparing drugs and devices. New drug therapies are costly, not affordable, and serve as a barrier to the successful treatment of heart failure.

Improvement of ejection fraction and mortality in ischaemic heart failure

OBJECTIVE

The frequency and predictors of improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in ischaemic cardiomyopathy and its association with mortality is poorly understood. We sought to assess the predictors of LVEF improvement ≥10% and its effect on mortality.

METHODS

We compared characteristics of patients enrolled in The Surgical Treatment for Ischaemic Heart Failure (STICH) trial with and without improvement of LVEF ≥10% at 24 months. A logistic regression model was constructed to determine the independent predictors of LVEF improvement. A Cox proportional hazards model was created to assess the independent association of improvement in LVEF ≥10% with mortality.

RESULTS

Of the 1212 patients enrolled in STICH, 618 underwent echocardiographic assessment of LVEF at baseline and 24 months. Of the patients randomised to medical therapy plus coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG), 58 (19%) had an improvement in LVEF >10% compared with 51 (16%) patients assigned to medical therapy alone (p=0.30). Independent predictors of LVEF improvement >10% included prior myocardial infarction (OR 0.44, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.71, p=0.001) and lower baseline LVEF (OR 0.94, 95% CI: 0.91 to 0.97, p<0.001). Improvement in LVEF >10% (HR 0.61, 95% CI: 0.44 to 0.84, p=0.004) and randomisation to CABG (HR 0.72, 95% CI: 0.57 to 0.90, p=0.004) were independently associated with a reduced hazard of mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Improvement of LVEF ≥10% at 24 months was uncommon in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy, did not differ between patients assigned to CABG and medical therapy or medical therapy alone and was independently associated with reduced mortality.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT00023595.

Structural and Physiological Imaging to Predict the Risk of Lethal Ventricular Arrhythmias and Sudden Death

Identifying patients at risk of sudden cardiac death remains a major challenge in cardiovascular medicine. Advances in cardiovascular imaging have identified several anatomic and functional variables that can be quantified as continuous variables to predict the risk of developing lethal ventricular tachyarrhythmias in patients with depressed left ventricular (LV) systolic function. Some, such as LV mass, volume, and the dyssynchrony of contraction, can be derived from currently available echocardiographic and nuclear imaging modalities. Others require advanced cardiac imaging modalities with quantification of myocardial scar with gadolinium-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance and myocardial sympathetic denervation using norepinephrine analogs and positron emission tomography or single-photon emission computed tomography offering the most promise. There is an immediate need to develop a sequential cost-effective approach that capitalizes on readily available clinical information complemented with advanced imaging modalities in selected patients to improve risk stratification for arrhythmic death beyond LV ejection fraction.

Why We Fail at Heart Failure: Lymphatic Insufficiency Is Disregarded

Is the definition of heart failure too narrow, not allowing research into compensatory mechanisms, comorbidities, right heart function, and lymphatic function?

A review of the absolute mortality of heart failure drugs and devices suggests a modest improvement in outcomes. Absolute mortality from common comorbidities, including renal insufficiency, arrhythmia, conduction deficits, pulmonary hypertension, anemia, obstructive sleep apnea, infection, inflammation, edema, ischemic heart disease, and diabetes II, is significant. The lymphatic function is involved in short, intermediate, and long-term compensation for a failing heart and plays a role in most of the comorbidities.

A better definition of heart failure is: Heart failure is a complex clinical syndrome that results from any structural or functional impairment of right or left ventricular filling or ejection of blood and failure of peripheral compensatory mechanisms. Lymphatic function from the anatomic, fluid management, immune modification standpoints requires study. New therapies from this analysis will improve patients with congestive heart failure.