Early Referral to Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Following Acute Coronary Syndrome, Trends and Outcomes from the Acute Coronary Syndrome Israeli Survey (ACSIS) 2000-2010

Complete surgical revascularization after NSTEMI and unstable angina in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: Institutional experience

INTRODUCTION

The feasibility and standardization of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) and unstable angina (UA) remain topics of ongoing debate. In this study, feasibility and early-term outcomes of CABG in patients with NSTE-ACS and UA were discussed.

METHODS

This study enrolled 79 patients who underwent on-pump CABG with complete revascularization between January 2020 and May 2022. the survival rates analyzed using Kaplan Meier test with log rank test. The p value of statistical significance was taken as below 0.05.

RESULTS

Preoperatively, the patients had a mean age of 60.9 years and a BMI of 28.0. The medical history included hypertension (50.6%), peripheral arterial disease and atrial fibrillation (12.7%), and other comorbidities such as COPD (22.8%) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (44.3%). Intraoperatively, the mean distal anastomosis count was 3.4, with average cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross-clamp times of 84.0 and 49.0 min, respectively. Early-term outcomes revealed low rates of mortality (2.5%) and complications such as myocardial infarction (1.3%), acute kidney injury (5.1%) and transient ischemic attack (5.1%). Post-discharge outcomes demonstrated low cardiac and all-cause mortality rates (2.5% and 3.8%, respectively) and a high overall survival rate (93.7%) at 12-month follow-up.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated the feasibility and positive outcomes of complete surgical revascularization in patients with UA and NSTE-ACS. It showed no graft occlusion or stroke, low complication rates and promising survival outcomes. Further research is needed for confirmation and to establish the procedure's efficacy and safety in this patient population.

The impact of on-site cardiac surgical backup on clinical outcomes of acute coronary syndrome-analysis of the ACSIS national registry

Background

The availability of advanced technologies for mechanical support in hospitals with on-site cardiac surgery (CS), along with the ability to perform urgent coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, may result in improved clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis of the bi-annually Acute Coronary Syndrome Israeli Survey (ACSIS) registry from the year 2000 to 2020, performed in hospitals with and without CS. Mortality rates and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) rates are reported. We evaluated two periods of the study-early (2000-2010) vs. late (2011-2020). Propensity score matching was performed to reduce bias between the two groups.

Results

The study included 16,979 patients (52.3% in the on-site CS group). Patients in the on-site CS group were more likely to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), (odds ratio [OR], 1.26 [95% CI, 1.18-1.35]; p < 0.001) and CABG [OR, 1.91 (95%CI, 1.63-2.24); P < 0.001], and patients in hospitals without on-site CS had higher 30-day MACCE [OR, 1.17 (95% CI, 1.07-1.27); p < 0.0005]. Overall, there was no difference in 1-year mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.98 [95% CI, 0.89-1.08]; p = 0.71) between the groups. During the late period of the study, patients in the group without on-site CS had lower 30-day mortality [OR, 0.69 (95% CI, 0.49-0.97); P = 0.04], yet with no difference in 1-year mortality [HR, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.65-1.01); p = 0.07].

Conclusions

The availability of on-site CS resulted in variations in treatment modality, yet it did not affect the clinical outcomes of ACS. A trend to a better short-term outcomes was noted in hospitals without CS during the late period of the study, which warrants further investigation.

Optimal Timing of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Haemodynamically Stable Patients after Myocardial Infarction

During the acute phase of myocardial infarction, the culprit artery must be revascularized quickly with angioplasty. Surgery then completes the procedure in a second stage. If emergency surgery is performed, the resulting death rate is high; 15-20% of patients are operated on within the first 48 h after the myocardial infarction. The timing of surgical revascularization and the patient's preoperative state influence the mortality rate. We aimed to evaluate the impact of surgery delay on morbimortality. Between 2007 and 2017, a retrospective monocentric study was conducted including 477 haemodynamically stable patients after myocardial infarction who underwent an urgent coronary bypass. Three groups were described, depending on the timing of the surgery: during the first 4 days (Group 1, n = 111, 23%), 5 to 10 days (Group 2, n = 242, 51%) and after 11 days (Group 3, n = 124, 26%). The overall thirty-day mortality was 7.1% (n = 34). The death rate was significantly higher in Group 1 (n = 16; 14% vs. n = 10; 4.0% vs. n = 8; 6%, p < 0.01). The mortality risk factors identified were age (OR: 1.08; CI 95%: 1.04-1.12; p < 0.001), peripheral arteriopathy (OR: 3.31; CI 95%: 1.16-9.43; p = 0.024), preoperative renal failure (OR: 6.39; CI 95%: 2.49-15.6; p < 0.001) and preoperative ischemic recurrence (OR: 3.47; CI 95%: 1.59-7.48; p < 0.01). Ninety-two patients presented with preoperative ischemic recurrence (19%), with no difference between the groups. The optimal timing for the surgical revascularization of MI seems to be after Day 4 in stable patients. However, timing is not the only factor influencing the death rate: the patient's health condition and disease severity must be considered in the individual management strategy.

Surgical revascularization for acute coronary syndromes: a report from the North Rhine-Westphalia surgical myocardial infarction registry

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this was to analyse current outcomes in patients referred to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for acute coronary syndromes (ACSs), including ST-elevation or non-ST-elevation ACS (non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction) or unstable angina.

METHODS

Patients (n = 2432) undergoing CABG for ACS between January 2010 and December 2017 were prospectively entered into a surgical myocardial infarction registry in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. Key end points were in-hospital all-cause mortality (IHM) and major adverse cardio-cerebral events (MACCE). Predictors for IHM and MACCE were analysed by multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Patients (78% males) were referred for CABG for unstable angina (25%), non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (50%), and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (25%). The mean patient age was 68 ± 11 years, logistic EuroSCORE was 19 ± 18% and three-vessel and left main stem diseases were diagnosed in 81% and 45% of patients, respectively. On-pump CABG with cardiac arrest or beating heart was performed in 92% and 2%, respectively, with only 6% off-pump surgery and 6% multiple arterial revascularization (3.1 ± 1.0 grafts, 93% left internal thoracic artery). Emergency CABG was performed in 23% of patients (42% in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; P < 0.001). The total IHM and MACCE rates were 8.1% and 17.5% and were highest in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients with 12.6% and 28.5%, respectively (P < 0.001). Key predictors for IHM and MACCE were female gender, elevated troponin, left ventricular ejection fraction, inotropic support, logistic EuroSCORE, cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic clamp time and the need for emergency CABG.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical myocardial revascularization in patients with ACS is still linked to substantial in-hospital mortality. Emergency CABG for patients with ACS was associated with poorer outcomes.

Re-evaluating the Role of CABG in Acute Coronary Syndromes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The use of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has markedly declined during the past decade, with an increase in the use of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, long-term data continues to show survival advantages for patients undergoing CABG over PCI. We describe the current indications for and outcomes of CABG in patients who present with ACS.

RECENT FINDINGS

Real-world studies demonstrate better long-term outcomes with CABG than with PCI after NSTE-ACS. Staged CABG after culprit-vessel PCI for STEMI is also a feasible option in certain patients. In patients presenting with ACS and cardiogenic shock who are treated with CABG, the use of mechanical circulatory support has produced a limited but significant reduction in mortality. The optimal revascularization strategy after ACS depends on many variables. The pre-eminent factor in selecting the best mode of revascularization and improving outcomes is careful patient selection based on deliberation by an interdisciplinary heart team.