Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with reduced ejection fraction

Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery: Evidence-Based Practice

Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery remains a pivotal cornerstone, offering established symptomatic alleviation and prognostic advantages for patients grappling with complex multivessel and left main coronary artery diseases. Despite the lucid guidance laid out by contemporary guidelines regarding the choice between CABG and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), a notable hesitation persists among certain patients, characterized by psychological reservations, knowledge gaps, or individual beliefs that sway their inclination toward surgical intervention. This comprehensive review critically synthesizes the prevailing guidelines, modern practices, and outcomes pertaining to CABG surgery, delving into an array of techniques and advancements poised to enhance both short-term and enduring surgical outcomes. The exploration encompasses advances in on-pump and off-pump procedures, conduit selection strategies encompassing the bilateral utilization of internal mammary artery and radial artery conduits, meticulous graft evaluation methodologies, and the panorama of minimally invasive approaches, including those assisted by robotic technology. Furthermore, the review navigates the terrain of hybrid coronary revascularization, shedding light on the pivotal roles of shared decision-making and the heart team in shaping treatment pathways. As a comprehensive compendium, this review not only navigates the intricate landscape of CABG surgery but also aligns it with contemporary practices, envisioning its trajectory within the evolving currents of healthcare dynamics.

The Long-Term Impact of Diastolic Dysfunction After Routine Cardiac Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of diastolic dysfunction (DD) on survival after routine cardiac surgery.

DESIGN

This was an observational study of consecutive cardiac surgeries from 2010 to 2021.

SETTING

At a single institution.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients undergoing isolated coronary, isolated valvular, and concomitant coronary and valvular surgery were included. Patients with a transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) longer than 6 months prior to their index surgery were excluded from the analysis.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were categorized via preoperative TTE as having no DD, grade I DD, grade II DD, or grade III DD.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A total of 8,682 patients undergoing a coronary and/or valvular surgery were identified, of whom 4,375 (50.4%) had no DD, 3,034 (34.9%) had grade I DD, 1,066 (12.3%) had grade II DD, and 207 (2.4%) had grade III DD. The median (IQR) time of the TTE prior to the index surgery was 6 (2-29) days. Operative mortality was 5.8% in the grade III DD group v 2.4% for grade II DD, 1.9% for grade I DD, and 2.1% for no DD (p = 0.001). Atrial fibrillation, prolonged mechanical ventilation (>24 hours), acute kidney injury, any packed red blood cell transfusion, reexploration for bleeding, and length of stay were higher in the grade III DD group compared to the rest of the cohort. The median follow-up was 4.0 (IQR: 1.7-6.5) years. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were lower in the grade III DD group than in the rest of the cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggested that DD may be associated with poor short-term and long-term outcomes.

Coronary Artery Bypass With Multiarterial Grafting vs Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

BACKGROUND

Data comparing patients who undergo multiarterial grafting during coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) vs percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with multivessel coronary disease are scarce. This study addresses the relevance of using multiple arterial conduits vs PCI for appropriate patients.

METHODS

This retrospective study included all patients with coronary artery disease who underwent CABG with multiple arterial conduits or PCI. Propensity score matching was performed for baseline characteristics. Kaplan-Meier estimates, cumulative incidence, and freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) curves were performed.

RESULTS

The total patient population consisted of 3648 patients from 2011 to 2018 divided into 902 CABG patients and 2746 PCI patients. Patients were propensity matched (PCI, n = 838; CABG, n = 838). In the CABG cohort the left internal mammary artery was used in 837 patients (99.9%), the right internal mammary artery in 770 patients (92%), and radial arteries in 108 patients (12.9%). Patients in the PCI cohort had significantly higher 30-day mortality (24 [2.9%] vs 7 [0.8%], P < .01). Survival over follow-up (median, 4.9 years; range, 3.3-6.8) was better for the CABG cohort (730 [87.1%] vs 625 [74.6%], P < .01). Patients in the CABG cohort had greater freedom from MACCE (607 [72.4%] vs 339 [40.5%], P < .01). Cox multivariable regression showed that patients who underwent CABG had a significantly reduced risk of mortality (hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.61; P < .01) and of MACCE (hazard ratio, 0.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.38; P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with coronary artery disease who undergo CABG with multiple arterial conduits have significantly fewer major adverse events, improved survival, and reduced hospital readmissions.

Impact of left ventricular ejection fraction on outcomes after left main revascularization: g-LM Registry

AIMS

The impact of left ventricular dysfunction on clinical outcomes following revascularization is not well established in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease (ULMCA). In this study, we evaluated the impact of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) on clinical outcomes of patients with ULMCA requiring revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG).

METHODS

The details of the design, methods, end points, and relevant definitions are outlined in the Gulf Left Main Registry: a retrospective, observational study conducted between January 2015 and December 2019 across 14 centres in 3 Gulf countries. In this study, the data on patients with ULMCA who underwent revascularization through PCI or CABG were stratified by LVEF into three main subgroups; low (l-LVEF <40%), mid-range (m-LVEF 40-49%), and preserved (p-LVEF ≥50%). Primary outcomes were hospital major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and mortality and follow-up MACCE and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 2137 patients were included; 1221 underwent PCI and 916 had CABG. During hospitalization, MACCE was significantly higher in patients with l-LVEF [(10.10%), P = 0.005] and m-LVEF [(10.80%), P = 0.009], whereas total mortality was higher in patients with m-LVEF [(7.40%), P = 0.009] and p-LVEF [(7.10%), P = 0.045] who underwent CABG. There was no mortality difference between groups in patients with l-LVEF. At a median follow-up of 15 months, there was no difference in MACCE and total mortality between patients who underwent CABG or PCI with p-LVEF and m-LVEF.

CONCLUSION

CABG was associated with higher in-hospital events. Hospital mortality in patients with l-LVEF was comparable between CABG and PCI. At 15 months' follow-up, PCI could have an advantage in decreasing MACCE in patients with l-LVEF.

Network meta-analysis of treatment strategies in patients with coronary artery disease and low left ventricular ejection fraction

OBJECTIVE

The optimal treatment strategy in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and low left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) remains controversial. Herein, we conducted a network meta-analysis comparing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and optimal medical therapy (OMT) in patients with CAD and low LVEF.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through March, 2021 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-score matched (PSM) studies comparing CABG, PCI, and OMT. We extracted hazard ratios (HRs) of the outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of three RCTs and 10 PSM trials were identified, yielding a total of 18,855 patients with CAD with low EF who were treated with CABG (n = 9241), PCI (n = 8771), or OMT (n = 1003). All-cause mortality was significantly lower in patients with CABG compared with those with PCI or OMT (HR [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 0.72 [0.62-0.82], p < .001, HR [95% CI] = 0.65 [0.51-0.82], p = .004, respectively), while no difference was observed between PCI and OMT. The rates of MI were significantly lower in patients treated with CABG compared to those treated with PCI or OMT. However, the subgroup analysis by limiting the PCI group to patients who received drug-eluting stent (DES) showed similar all-cause mortality between CABG and PCI, while both CABG and PCI were associated with lower all-cause mortality compared with OMT.

CONCLUION

The present study demonstrated that CABG was the appropriate treatment strategy in patients with CAD and low LVEF. Further long-term trials were warranted to investigate outcomes of PCI with DES compared with CABG.

Complete revascularization during coronary artery bypass grafting is associated with reduced major adverse events

OBJECTIVE

Complete revascularization literature is limited by variance in patient cohorts and inconsistent definitions. The objective of the current study was to provide risk-adjusted outcomes for complete revascularization of significant nonmain-branch and main-branch vessel stenoses.

METHODS

All patients that underwent first-time isolated coronary artery bypass grafting procedures were included. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates, cumulative incidence function, and Cox regression were used to analyze outcomes.

RESULTS

The total population consisted of 3356 patients that underwent first-time isolated coronary artery bypass grafting. Eight hundred eighty-nine (26.5%) patients had incomplete and 2467 (73.5%) had complete revascularization. For main-branch vessels, 677 (20.2%) patients had incomplete revascularization and 2679 (79.8%) were completely revascularized. Following risk adjustment with inverse probability treatment weighting, all baseline characteristics were balanced (standardized mean difference, ≤ 0.10). On Kaplan-Meier estimates, survival at 1 year (94.6% vs 92.5%) and 5 years (86.5% vs 82.1%) (P = .05) was significantly better for patients who received complete revascularization. Freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events was significantly higher for the complete revascularization cohort at both 1 year (89.2% vs 84.2%) and 5 years (72.5% vs 66.7%) (P < .001). Complete revascularization (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.95; P = .01) was independently associated with a significant reduction in major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events. Incomplete revascularization of nonmain-branch vessels was not associated with mortality (hazard ratio, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-1.8; P = .55) or major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-1.24; P = .52).

CONCLUSIONS

Complete surgical revascularization of all angiographically stenotic vessels in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease is associated with fewer major adverse events. Incomplete revascularization of nonmain-branch vessels is not associated with survival or major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events.