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

Impact of Anatomical and Viability-Guided Completeness of Revascularization on Clinical Outcomes in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND

Complete revascularization of coronary artery disease has been linked to improved outcomes in patients with preserved left ventricular (LV) function.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to identify the impact of complete revascularization in patients with severe LV dysfunction.

METHODS

Patients enrolled in the REVIVED-BCIS2 (Revascularization for Ischemic Ventricular Dysfunction) trial were eligible if baseline/procedural angiograms and viability studies were available for analysis by independent core laboratories. Anatomical and viability-guided completeness of revascularization were measured by the coronary and myocardial revascularization indices (RIcoro and RImyo), respectively, where RIcoro = (change in British Cardiovascular Intervention Society Jeopardy score [BCIS-JS]) / (baseline BCIS-JS) and RImyo= (number of revascularized viable segments) / (number of viable segments supplied by diseased vessels). The percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) group was classified as having complete or incomplete revascularization by median RIcoro and RImyo. The primary outcome was death or hospitalization for heart failure.

RESULTS

Of 700 randomized patients, 670 were included. The baseline BCIS-JS and SYNTAX (Synergy Between PCI With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) scores were 8 (Q1-Q3: 6-10) and 22 (Q1-Q3: 15-29), respectively. In those patients assigned to PCI, median RIcoro and RImyo values were 67% and 85%, respectively. Compared with the group assigned to optimal medical therapy alone, there was no difference in the likelihood of the primary outcome in those patients receiving complete anatomical or viability-guided revascularization (HR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.62-1.32; and HR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.66-1.35, respectively). A sensitivity analysis by residual SYNTAX score showed no association with outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with severe LV dysfunction, neither complete anatomical nor viability-guided revascularization was associated with improved event-free survival compared with incomplete revascularization or treatment with medical therapy alone. (Revascularization for Ischemic Ventricular Dysfunction) [REVIVED-BCIS2]; NCT01920048).

Machine learning predictions of the adverse events of different treatments in patients with ischemic left ventricular systolic dysfunction

This study aimed to develop several new machine learning models based on hibernating myocardium to predict the major adverse cardiac events(MACE) of ischemic left ventricular systolic dysfunction(LVSD) patients receiving either percutaneous coronary intervention(PCI) or optimal medical therapy(OMT). This study included 329 LVSD patients, who were randomly assigned to the training or validation cohort. Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator(LASSO) regression was used to identify variables associated with MACE. Subsequently, various machine learning models were established. Model performance was compared using receiver operating characteristic(ROC) curves, the Brier score(BS), and the concordance index(C-index). A total of 329 LVSD patients were retrospectively enrolled between January 2016 and December 2021. Utilizing LASSO regression analysis, five factors were selected. Based on these factors, RSF, GBM, XGBoost, Cox, and DeepSurv models were constructed. In the development and validation cohorts, the C-indices were 0.888 vs. 0.955 (RSF). The RSF model (0.991 vs. 0.982 vs. 0.980) had the highest area under the ROC curve (AUC) compared with the other models. The BS (0.077 vs. 0.095vs. 0.077) of RSF model were less than 0.25 at 12, 18, and 24 months. This study developed a novel predictive model based on RSF to predict MACE in LVSD patients who underwent either PCI or OMT.

Selecting the appropriate patients for coronary artery bypass grafting in ischemic cardiomyopathy-importance of myocardial viability

Patients who undergo coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery in ischemic cardiomyopathy have a survival advantage over medical therapy at 10 years. The survival advantage of CABG over medical therapy is due to its ability to reduce future myocardial infarction, and by conferring electrical stability. The presence of myocardial viability does not provide a differential survival advantage for CABG over medical therapy. Presence of angina and inducible ischemia are also less predictive of outcome. Moreover, CABG is associated with significant early mortality. Hence, careful patient selection is more important for reducing the early mortality and improving the long-term outcome than relying on results of myocardial viability. Younger patients with good exercise tolerance benefit the most, while patients who are frail and patients with renal dysfunction and dysfunctional right ventricle seem to have very high operative mortality. Elderly patients, because of poor life expectancy, do not benefit from CABG, but the age cutoff is not clear. Patients also need to have revascularizable targets, but this decision is often based on experience of the surgical team and heart team discussion. These recommendations are irrespective of the myocardial viability tests. Optimal medical treatment remains the cornerstone for management of ischemic cardiomyopathy.

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.

[Prediction of myocardial contractility after coronary bypass surgery according to preoperative contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and echocardiography]

OBJECTIVE

To establish the criteria for reversibility of myocardial contractility in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) after coronary artery bypass grafting considering data of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and echocardiography.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We studied the results of coronary artery bypass grafting in 186 patients with CAD complicated by reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (<30%). All patients underwent cardiac MRI and echocardiography before surgery. Immediate and long-term results were evaluated according to echocardiography and MRI data.

RESULTS

We confirmed the previously established predictors of improvement in left ventricular contractility: diastolic IVST ≥10.5 mm and PWT ≥9.5 mm, score of LV myocardium damage according to MRI with delayed contrast enhancement (p<0.05). Multivariate analysis makes it possible to calculate prognostic index and obtain information about further myocardial contractility after revascularization with an error of 6%.

CONCLUSION

Echocardiography and contrast-enhanced cardiac MRI are valuable to assess morphological and functional state of the left ventricle in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and preoperatively determine functional reserve of the myocardium.

Prediction of left ventricular ejection fraction improvement in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy after coronary artery bypass grafting based on cardiac magnetic resonance

Background

To investigate the risk factors of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) improvement in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), and to construct a model that predicts LVEF improvement.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on 106 ICM patients who received CABG and underwent cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) at Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University from January 2017 to June 2022. Patients were divided into two groups with improved LVEF and no improved LVEF based on the results of postoperative 6-month transthoracic echocardiography. To analyze the risk factors affecting the LVEF non-improvement after CABG and establish a prediction model.

Results

There was LVEF non-improvement in 30.2% (32/106) of patients. Multivariate analysis showed that the number of transmural scar segments and left ventricular end-systolic volume index (LVESVI) were independent risk factors in LVEF non-improvement after CABG [odds ratio (OR) =2.398, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.607-3.579, P<0.001; OR =1.036, 95% CI: 1.009-1.063, P=0.008]. The model is built and internally verified. ROC showed that the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.866 (95% CI: 0.792-0.940), calibration curve showed that the probability predicted by the model matched well with the clinical results, and decision curve analysis (DCA) showed that the model had good clinical applicability. During the mean follow-up time of 1.5 years, the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) in the LVEF non-improvement group was higher (5.4% vs. 25.0%, P=0.009), and the NYHA grading was higher (P=0.016), when compared to the LVEF improvement group.

Conclusions

The prediction model based on the number of transmural scar segments and LVESVI has good diagnostic efficacy. Our findings help to identify patients with improved LVEF and thus guide the selection of clinical treatment strategies.

Viability and Outcomes With Revascularization or Medical Therapy in Ischemic Ventricular Dysfunction: A Prespecified Secondary Analysis of the REVIVED-BCIS2 Trial

Importance

In the Revascularization for Ischemic Ventricular Dysfunction (REVIVED-BCIS2) trial, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) did not improve outcomes for patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. Whether myocardial viability testing had prognostic utility for these patients or identified a subpopulation who may benefit from PCI remained unclear.

Objective

To determine the effect of the extent of viable and nonviable myocardium on the effectiveness of PCI, prognosis, and improvement in left ventricular function.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Prospective open-label randomized clinical trial recruiting between August 28, 2013, and March 19, 2020, with a median follow-up of 3.4 years (IQR, 2.3-5.0 years). A total of 40 secondary and tertiary care centers in the United Kingdom were included. Of 700 randomly assigned patients, 610 with left ventricular ejection fraction less than or equal to 35%, extensive coronary artery disease, and evidence of viability in at least 4 myocardial segments that were dysfunctional at rest and who underwent blinded core laboratory viability characterization were included. Data analysis was conducted from March 31, 2022, to May 1, 2023.

Intervention

Percutaneous coronary intervention in addition to optimal medical therapy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Blinded core laboratory analysis was performed of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging scans and dobutamine stress echocardiograms to quantify the extent of viable and nonviable myocardium, expressed as an absolute percentage of left ventricular mass. The primary outcome of this subgroup analysis was the composite of all-cause death or hospitalization for heart failure. Secondary outcomes were all-cause death, cardiovascular death, hospitalization for heart failure, and improved left ventricular function at 6 months.

Results

The mean (SD) age of the participants was 69.3 (9.0) years. In the PCI group, 258 (87%) were male, and in the optimal medical therapy group, 277 (88%) were male. The primary outcome occurred in 107 of 295 participants assigned to PCI and 114 of 315 participants assigned to optimal medical therapy alone. There was no interaction between the extent of viable or nonviable myocardium and the effect of PCI on the primary or any secondary outcome. Across the study population, the extent of viable myocardium was not associated with the primary outcome (hazard ratio per 10% increase, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.93-1.04) or any secondary outcome. The extent of nonviable myocardium was associated with the primary outcome (hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.00-1.15), all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and improvement in left ventricular function.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found that viability testing does not identify patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy who benefit from PCI. The extent of nonviable myocardium, but not the extent of viable myocardium, is associated with event-free survival and likelihood of improvement of left ventricular function.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01920048.

Understanding the role of coronary artery revascularization in patients with left ventricular dysfunction and multivessel disease

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is the most common cause of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Advances and innovations in medical therapy have been shown to play a crucial role in improving the prognosis of patients with CAD and HFrEF; however, mortality rate in these patients remains high, and the role of surgical and/or percutaneous revascularization strategy is still debated. The Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure (STICH) trial and the Revascularization for Ischemic Ventricular Dysfunction (REVIVED) trial have attempted to provide an answer to this issue. Nevertheless, the results of these two trials have generated further uncertainties. Their findings do not provide a definitive answer about the ideal clinical phenotype for surgical or percutaneous coronary revascularization and dispute the historical dogma on myocardial viability and the theory of myocardial hibernation, raising new questions about the proper selection of patients who are candidates for coronary revascularization. The aim of this review is to provide an overview on the actual available evidence of coronary artery revascularization in patients with CAD and left ventricular dysfunction and to suggest new insights on the proper selection and management strategies in this high-risk clinical setting.

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.

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.

Usefulness of the Vall d'Hebron Risk Score to stratify the risk of patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the Vall d'Hebron-Risk-Score (VH-RS) to stratify the risk of patients with stable ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM), and assess whether hemoglobin (Hb) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) provide additional information to the VH-RS.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We analysed 673 consecutive patients with ICM who underwent gated SPECT. According to VH-RS, we stratified patients into 4-risk-levels: very-low-risk (VLR), low-risk (LR), moderate-risk (MR), and high-risk (HRi). We considered as MACEs: non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), heart failure hospitalization (HF), coronary revascularization (CR), and cardiac death (CD). Also the cardiac-resynchronization-therapy (CRT), and the implantable-cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) were investigated. During the follow-up (4.8 ± 2.7 years), 379 patients had MACEs (0.18/patient/year). There were no patients in VLR and LR. All patients were reclassified in 3-risk-levels (MRi = 48; HRi = 121; VHRi[very high risk] = 504). Most patients with MACEs were in VHRi level (test-for-trend: MACEs ≥ 1 without CRT/ICD, P < .001; combined non-fatal MI, CD and CR, P < .001; MACEs ≥ 1 with CRT/ICD, P < .001). The Hb and eGFR values do not properly improve the risk stratification obtained by the VH-RS (global-NRI[net-reclassification-improvement] was: (MACEs ≥ 1 without CRT/ICD: - 10.6%; non-fatal MI, CD and CR: - 9.08%; and MACEs ≥ 1 with CRT/ICD: - 8.85%).

CONCLUSION

VH-RS is effective in evaluating risk of patients with stable ICM. In our population, adding Hb and eGFR variables do not improve the performance of the VH-RS.

Predicting left ventricular functional recovery in ischaemic cardiomyopathy: needs and challenges

Left ventricular (LV) systolic function is an essential parameter for the evaluation of patients with ischaemic heart disease, and therapeutic choices are significantly driven by LV ejection fraction (LVEF) in the early stage of the disease and during follow-up. After an acute coronary syndrome, ventricular dysfunction may be reversible when caused by transient myocardial stunning. Therefore, the identification of clinical, laboratory, and instrumental predictors of improvement in LV systolic function (in addition to LVEF) is essential for an adequate prognostic stratification. In the setting of chronic ischaemic heart disease, there is no evidence that an improvement in LV systolic function is invariably associated with a better prognosis and LVEF is only one of many parameters that should be considered for the risk stratification. This state-of-the-art review will critically analyse the scientific evidence regarding known predictors of LVEF recovery, trying to elucidate their pathophysiological principles and clinical value.

Patient Selection and Clinical Indication for Chronic Total Occlusion Revascularization-A Workflow Focusing on Non-Invasive Cardiac Imaging

Percutaneous coronary intervention of chronic total occlusion (CTO PCI) is a challenging procedure with high complication rates and, as not yet fully understood long-term clinical benefits. Ischemic symptom relief in patients with high ischemic burden is to date the only established clinical indication to undergo CTO PCI, supported by randomized controlled trials. In this context, current guidelines suggest attempting CTO PCI only in non-invasively assessed viable CTO correspondent myocardial territories, with large ischemic areas. Hence, besides a comprehensive coronary angiography lesion evaluation, the information derived from non-invasive cardiac imaging techniques is crucial to selecting candidates who may benefit from the revascularization of the occluded vessel. Currently, there are no clear recommendations for a non-invasive myocardial evaluation or choice of imaging modality pre-CTO PCI. Therefore, selecting among available options is left to the physician's discretion. As CTO PCI is strongly recommended to be carried out explicitly in experienced centers, full access to non-invasive imaging for risk-benefit assessment as well as a systematic institutional evaluation process has to be encouraged. In this framework, we opted to review the current myocardial imaging tools and their use for indicating a CTO PCI. Furthermore, based on our experience, we propose a cost-effective systematic approach for myocardial assessment to help guide clinical decision-making for patients presenting with chronic total occlusions.

The association of collaterals with myocardial ischemia and viability in chronic total occlusions

Collateral development in chronic total occlusions (CTO) is crucial to perfuse the distal myocardium and its angiographic evaluation is frequently used to assess the need for revascularization. We aimed to analyse the association between the presence of ischemia and hibernating myocardium, evaluated by cardiac [¹³ N]NH3/2-[¹⁸ F]FDG PET-CT, and the angiographic characterization of the collateral circulation. Prospective study including patients with a CTO who underwent a [¹³ N]NH3 and, when deemed necessary, 2-[¹⁸ F]FDG PET-CT. Well developed (WD) collaterals were defined as a concomitant angiographic Rentrop grade 3 and Werner collateral connection score 2 or 3, whereas the remaining as poorly developed (PD). 2% thresholds used to identify prognostic benefit of revascularization were applied: ischemia > 10% and hibernating myocardium > 7%. Fifty-nine patients (age 62.9±9.1 years, 58 male) were recruited, WD collaterals were present in 28 (47.5%). No significant differences were found in ischemia (WD 6.4±4.3 vs. PD 7.0±4.1, p = 0.64) and hibernation (WD 1.8±1.9 vs. PD 3.1±3.3, p = 0.18) scores. Most CTO territories demonstrated ischemia, but only 19 (46.3%) were associated with an area > 10% (WD 47.6% vs. PD 45.0%, p = 0.58). Scared non-viable myocardium was limited to 9 (15.3%) patients and was not associated with PD collaterals. Hibernating myocardium was frequent (54.2%), but just 6 (10.2%) CTO patients had an area of > 7% (WD 3.6% vs. PD 16.1%, p = 0.20). Collateral assessment by angiography has a poor association with the ischemic burden and hibernation state of CTO territories. Myocardial viability was present even in most CTO with angiographic PD collaterals.

Percutaneous Revascularization for Ischemic Left Ventricular Dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Whether revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) can improve event-free survival and left ventricular function in patients with severe ischemic left ventricular systolic dysfunction, as compared with optimal medical therapy (i.e., individually adjusted pharmacologic and device therapy for heart failure) alone, is unknown.

METHODS

We randomly assigned patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 35% or less, extensive coronary artery disease amenable to PCI, and demonstrable myocardial viability to a strategy of either PCI plus optimal medical therapy (PCI group) or optimal medical therapy alone (optimal-medical-therapy group). The primary composite outcome was death from any cause or hospitalization for heart failure. Major secondary outcomes were left ventricular ejection fraction at 6 and 12 months and quality-of-life scores.

RESULTS

A total of 700 patients underwent randomization - 347 were assigned to the PCI group and 353 to the optimal-medical-therapy group. Over a median of 41 months, a primary-outcome event occurred in 129 patients (37.2%) in the PCI group and in 134 patients (38.0%) in the optimal-medical-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 1.27; P = 0.96). The left ventricular ejection fraction was similar in the two groups at 6 months (mean difference, -1.6 percentage points; 95% CI, -3.7 to 0.5) and at 12 months (mean difference, 0.9 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.7 to 3.4). Quality-of-life scores at 6 and 12 months appeared to favor the PCI group, but the difference had diminished at 24 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with severe ischemic left ventricular systolic dysfunction who received optimal medical therapy, revascularization by PCI did not result in a lower incidence of death from any cause or hospitalization for heart failure. (Funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Technology Assessment Program; REVIVED-BCIS2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01920048.).

Coronary Revascularization and Out-of-hospital Cardiac Arrest: Past, Present and Future

Cardiologists and the cardiac catheter laboratory have key roles to play in the management of patients after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Although immediate catheter laboratory activation is the standard of care in cardiogenic shock and ST elevation myocardial infarction, the majority of patients will present without these features and with an uncertain diagnosis. Even in the latter, early assessment and invasive management may be beneficial, but this is counterbalanced by significant resource utilization, potential to cause harm and the possibility that any diagnostic or therapeutic gains are offset by a poor neurological outcome. Past consensus on the management of the OHCA patient without ST elevation or cardiogenic shock is being challenged by emerging results from new trials in this field. Further randomized trials are ongoing, and are expected to deliver robust data from over 4,000 patients, allowing us to further refine the optimal management strategy in this challenging cohort. This article describes the benefits and pitfalls of a strategy of immediate coronary angiography in these patients, examines the recently published COACT and TOMAHAWK trials in detail, and describes a framework with which to approach the patient after resuscitated OHCA, based on the available evidence to date.