Outcomes Research in Review

The Role of Revascularization and Viability Testing in Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease and Severely Reduced Ejection Fraction


 

References

Third, although the primary outcome was similar between the groups, the secondary outcome of unplanned revascularization was lower in the PCI group. In addition, the rate of acute myocardial infarction (MI) was similar between the 2 groups, but the rate of spontaneous MI was lower in the PCI group compared to the OMT group (5.2% vs 9.3%) as 40% of MI cases in the PCI group were periprocedural MIs. The correlation between periprocedural MI and long-term outcomes has been modest compared to spontaneous MI. Moreover, with the longer follow-up, the number of spontaneous MI cases is expected to rise while the number of periprocedural MI cases is not. Extending the follow-up period is also important, as the STICH extension trial showed a statistically significant difference at 10-year follow up despite negative results at the time of the original publication.

Fourth, the REVIVED trial randomized a significantly lower number of patients compared to the STICH trial, and the authors reported fewer primary-outcome events than the estimated number needed to achieve the power to assess the primary hypothesis. In addition, significant improvements in medical treatment for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction since the STICH trial make comparison of PCI vs CABG in this patient population unfeasible.

Finally, although severe angina was not an exclusion criterion, two-thirds of the patients enrolled had no angina, and only 2% of the patients had baseline severe angina. This is important to consider when interpreting the results of the patient-reported health status as previous studies have shown that patients with worse angina at baseline derive the largest improvement in their QOL,10,11 and symptom improvement is the main indication for PCI in patients with stable ischemic heart disease.

Applications for Clinical Practice and System Implementation

In patients with severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction and multivessel stable ischemic heart disease who are well compensated and have little or no angina at baseline, OMT alone as an initial strategy may be considered against the addition of PCI after careful risk and benefit discussion. Further details about revascularization and extended follow-up data from the REVIVED trial are necessary.

Practice Points

  • Patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy with reduced ejection fraction have been an understudied population in previous studies.
  • Further studies are necessary to understand the benefits of revascularization and the role of viability testing in this population.

Taishi Hirai MD, and Ziad Sayed Ahmad, MD
University of Missouri, Columbia, MO

Pages

Recommended Reading

No survival advantage for either torsemide or furosemide in HF: TRANSFORM-HF
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
Avoid routine early ECMO in severe cardiogenic shock: ECMO-CS
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
Precision CAD testing shows 70% cut in composite risk at 1 year
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
New trial suggests CV benefit with EPA: RESPECT-EPA
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
‘Lucid dying’: EEG backs near-death experience during CPR 
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
EHR-based thromboembolism risk tool boosted prophylaxis
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
First-line AFib ablation cuts risk of progression vs. drug therapy
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
Tirzepatide cuts BP during obesity treatment
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
Optimize HF meds rapidly and fully after hospital discharge: STRONG-HF
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
A plane crash interrupts a doctor’s vacation
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management