Coronary artery disease in patients 35 years of age or older with valvular aortic stenosis

Contemporary prevalence of coronary artery disease in patients referred for heart valve surgery

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing heart valve surgery are routinely evaluated for the presence of coronary artery disease (CAD). Currently, concomitant valve intervention and surgical revascularization is recommended when there is obstructive CAD. The aim of our study was to evaluate the prevalence of CAD, its treatment strategies, and their prognostic implications in a contemporary population of patients with valvular heart disease (VHD) referred for valve surgery (HVS).

METHODS

In a multicenter registry, consecutive patients with formal indication for HVS referred for a preoperative routine invasive coronary angiogram (ICA) were analyzed. Baseline characteristics, CAD prevalence and revascularization patterns, as well as their impact on short and mid-term all-cause mortality, were assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 1133 patients were included; most had aortic stenosis (69%) and obstructive CAD was present in 307 (27.1%). HVS was ultimately performed in 82.3%. In patients with CAD, 53.4% were revascularized. After a mean follow-up time of 29.06±18.46 months, all-cause mortality rate was 12.9%. In multivariate analysis, not having HVS (HR 6.845, 95% CI=4.281-10.947, P<0.001), obstructive CAD (HR 2.762, 95% CI=1.764-4.326, P<0.01), COPD (HR 2.043, 95% CI=1.014-4.197, P=0.022), and age (HR 1.030, 95% CI=1.009-1.063, P=0.047), were independent predictors of all-cause mortality. In patients with obstructive CAD who underwent HVS, revascularization was not significantly associated with survival (HR 2.127, 95% CI=0.0-4.494, P=0.048; log rank P=0.042).

CONCLUSIONS

In a contemporary cohort of patients with VHD and surgical indication, overall obstructive CAD prevalence was 27%. CAD presence and severity were associated with higher mortality. However, revascularization was not associated with a survival benefit, except in patients with left anterior descending artery disease.

Prevalence and Prediction of Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease in Patients Undergoing Primary Heart Valve Surgery

Background

The prevalence of coronary artery disease (CAD) in valvular patients is similar to that of the general population, with the usual association with traditional risk factors. Nevertheless, the search for obstructive CAD is more aggressive in the preoperative period of patients with valvular heart disease, resulting in the indication of invasive coronary angiography (ICA) to almost all adult patients, because it is believed that coronary artery bypass surgery should be associated with valve replacement.

Objectives

To evaluate the prevalence of obstructive CAD and factors associated with it in adult candidates for primary heart valve surgery between 2001 and 2014 at the National Institute of Cardiology (INC) and, thus, derive and validate a predictive obstructive CAD score.

Methods

Cross-sectional study evaluating 2898 patients with indication for heart surgery of any etiology. Of those, 712 patients, who had valvular heart disease and underwent ICA in the 12 months prior to surgery, were included. The P value < 0.05 was adopted as statistical significance.

Results

The prevalence of obstructive CAD was 20%. A predictive model of obstructive CAD was created from multivariate logistic regression, using the variables age, chest pain, family history of CAD, systemic arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, smoking, and male gender. The model showed excellent correlation and calibration (R² = 0.98), as well as excellent accuracy (ROC of 0.848; 95%CI: 0.817-0.879) and validation (ROC of 0.877; 95%CI: 0.830 - 0.923) in different valve populations.

Conclusions

Obstructive CAD can be estimated from clinical data of adult candidates for valve repair surgery, using a simple, accurate and validated score, easy to apply in clinical practice, which may contribute to changes in the preoperative strategy of acquired heart valve surgery in patients with a lower probability of obstructive disease.

Prevalence and prediction of obstructive coronary artery disease in patients referred for valvular heart surgery

Current guidelines recommend a coronary evaluation before valvular heart surgery (VHS). Diagnostic coronary angiography is recommended in patients with known coronary artery disease (CAD) and those with high pretest probability of CAD. In patients with low or intermediate pretest probability of CAD, the guidelines recommend coronary computed tomographic angiography. However, there are no tools available to objectively assess a patient's risk for obstructive CAD before VHS. To address this deficit, 5,360 patients without histories of CAD who underwent diagnostic coronary angiography as part of preoperative evaluation for VHS were identified. Obstructive CAD was defined as ≥50% stenosis in ≥1 artery. Of the patients assessed, 1,035 (19.3%) were found to have obstructive CAD. Through multivariate analysis, age, gender, diabetes, renal dysfunction, hyperlipidemia, and a family history of premature CAD were found to be associated with the presence of obstructive CAD (p <0.001 for all). After adjustment, the specific dysfunctional valve was not associated with the presence of obstructive CAD. Patients were then randomly split into derivation and validation cohorts. Within the derivation cohort, using only age, gender, and the presence or absence of risk factors, a model was constructed to predict the risk for obstructive CAD (C statistic 0.766, 95% confidence interval 0.750 to 0.783). The risk prediction model performed well within the validation cohort (C statistic 0.767, 95% confidence interval 0.751 to 0.784, optimism 0.004). The bias-corrected C statistic for the model was 0.765 (95% confidence interval 0.748 to 0.782). In conclusion, this novel risk prediction tool can be used to objectively risk-stratify patients who undergo preoperative evaluation before VHS and to facilitate appropriate triage to computed tomographic angiography or diagnostic coronary angiography.

Noncardiac surgery in patients with aortic stenosis: a contemporary study on outcomes in a matched sample from the Danish health care system

BACKGROUND

Past research has identified aortic stenosis (AS) as a major risk factor for adverse outcomes in noncardiac surgery; however, more contemporary studies have questioned the grave prognosis. To further our understanding of this, the risks of a 30-day major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) and all-cause mortality were investigated in a contemporary Danish cohort.

HYPOTHESIS

AS is not an independent risk factor for adverse outcomes in noncardiac surgery.

METHODS

All patients with and without diagnosed AS who underwent noncardiac surgery in 2005 to 2011 were identified through nationwide administrative registers. AS patients (n = 2823; mean age, 75.5 years, 53% female) were matched with patients without AS (n = 2823) on propensity score for AS and surgery type.

RESULTS

In elective surgery, MACE (ie, nonfatal myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or cardiovascular death) occurred in 66/1772 (3.7%) of patients with AS and 52/1772 (2.9%) of controls (P = 0.19), whereas mortality occurred in 67/1772 (3.8%) AS patients and 51/1772 (2.9%) controls (P = 0.13). In emergency surgery, 163/1051 (15.5%) AS patients and 120/1051 (11.4%) controls had a MACE (P = 0.006), whereas 225/1051 (21.4%) vs 179/1051 (17.0%) AS patients and controls died, respectively (P = 0.01). Event rates were higher for those with symptoms (defined as use of nitrates, congestive heart failure, or use of loop diuretics), compared with those without symptoms (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

AS is associated with high perioperative rates of MACE and mortality, but perhaps prognosis is, in practice, not much worse for patients with AS than for matched controls. Symptomatic patients and patients undergoing emergency surgery are at considerable risks of a MACE and mortality.

Changing strategy for aortic stenosis with coronary artery disease by transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is combined with aortic stenosis (AS) in 40-50 % of patients with typical angina. Recently, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has changed the guideline for AS in patients with high comorbidity. At the same time more than 60 % of isolated CABG has been performed without cardiopulmonary bypass in Japan. CABG is recommended and should be considered in patients with primary indication for AVR and luminal stenosis >70 % in major coronary arteries and the left internal thoracic artery (LITA) by guidelines. AVR is indicated for severe AS undergoing CABG. It is generally accepted to perform AVR for moderate AS at the time of CABG by valve guidelines. However, prophylactic AVR for moderate AS associated with CABG may increase the early operative risk and expose the patients to postoperative long-term valve related complications. AVR after previous CABG poses potential risk for mortality and morbidity. The presence of patent ITA is a significant risk of its injury and difficulty of myocardial protection during aortic cross-clamping. Therefore, at present, for severe AS previous CABG with patent ITA should be one of the definite indications of TAVI. Rationale of TAVI in patients with severe AS and CAD has not been clearly delineated. The safety of TAVI irrespective of the extent and anatomy of CAD is still controversial. PCI is not appropriate before TAVI in high-risk patients with CAD. In the near future hybrid TAVI will be realistic considering least operative mortality and morbidity in high-risk patients.

Impact of coronary artery disease on outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery disease (CAD) negatively impacts prognosis of patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement and revascularization is generally recommended at the time of surgery. Implications of CAD and preprocedural revascularization in the setting of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are not known.

METHOD

Patients who underwent successful TAVI from January 2005 to December 2007 were retrospectively divided into five groups according to the extent of CAD assessed with the Duke Myocardial Jeopardy Score: no CAD, CAD with DMJS 0, 2, 4, and > or =6. Study endpoints included 30-day and 1-year survival, evolution of symptoms, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and mitral regurgitation (MR) and need of revascularization during follow-up.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-six patients were included, among which 104 (76.5%) had coexisting CAD. Thirty-day mortality in the five study groups was respectively 6.3, 14.6, 7.1, 5.6, and 17.7% with no statistically significant difference between groups (P = 0.56). Overall survival rate at one year was 77.9% (95% CL: 70.9, 84.9) with no difference between groups (P = 0.63). Symptoms, LVEF, and MR all significantly improved in the first month after TAVI, but the extent of improvement did not differ between groups (P > 0.08). Revascularization after TAVI was uncommon.

CONCLUSION

The presence of CAD or nonrevascularized myocardium was not associated with an increased risk of adverse events in this initial cohort. On the basis of these early results, complete revascularization may not constitute a prerequisite of TAVI. This conclusion will require re-assessment as experience accrues in patients with extensive CAD.

Decision analysis in clinical cardiology: when is coronary angiography required in aortic stenosis?

Decision analysis offers a reproducible, explicit approach to complex clinical decisions. It consists of developing a model, typically a decision tree, that separates choices from chances and that specifies and assigns relative values to outcomes. Sensitivity analysis allows exploration of alternative assumptions. Cost-effectiveness analysis shows the relation between dollars spent and improved health outcomes achieved. In a tutorial format, this approach is applied to the decision whether to perform coronary angiography in a patient who requires aortic valve replacement for critical aortic stenosis.