Search

Background: In patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy and viable myocardium, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) does not always improve after revascularisation. Whether this may affect prognosis is unclear., Objective: To evaluate the prognosis of viable patients with and without improvement of LVEF after coronary revascularisation., Methods: Before revascularisation, radionuclide ventriculography (RNV) and dobutamine stress echocardiography were performed to assess LVEF and myocardial viability, respectively. Nine to 12 months after revascularisation, LVEF improvement was assessed by RNV. Patients were divided into three groups: group 1, viable patients with LVEF improvement (n = 27); group 2, viable patients without LVEF improvement (n = 15), group 3, non-viable patients (n = 48). Cardiac events were evaluated during a 4-year follow-up., Results: After revascularisation, the mean (SD) LVEF improved from 32 (9)% to 42 (10)% in group 1, but did not change significantly in group 2 and in group 3, p<0.001 by analysis of variance (ANOVA). Heart failure symptoms improved in both groups 1 (mean (SD) NYHA class from 3.1 (0.9) to 1.7 (0.7)) and 2 (from 3.2 (0.7) to 1.7 (0.9)), but not in group 3 (from 2.8 (1.0) to 2.7 (0.5)), p<0.001 by ANOVA. During follow-up, the cardiac event rate was low (4%) in group 1, intermediate (21%) in group 2 and high (33%) in group 3 (p = 0.01)., Conclusion: The best prognosis after revascularisation may be expected in those viable patients whose LVEF improves. Conversely, viable patients without functional improvement have an intermediate prognosis.

Background: Diabetes mellitus in patients with coronary artery disease is associated with poor outcome. In this study, the relation between myocardial viability, diabetes, coronary revascularisation and outcome was evaluated., Methods: 129 patients (31 diabetic, 98 non-diabetic) with ischaemic cardiomyopathy underwent dobutamine stress echocardiography to assess myocardial viability. Patients with >or=4 viable segments were defined as viable and patients with <4 viable segments as nonviable. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was assessed before and 9-12 months post-revascularisation. At the same time-points, LV volumes were measured to evaluate LV remodelling. Finally, cardiac events were noted during 5-year follow-up., Results: The extent of viable myocardium was comparable between diabetic and non-diabetic patients. After revascularisation, LVEF increased >or=5% in 44% of diabetic and in 40% of non-diabetic patients. LVEF only improved in patients with viable myocardium. Ongoing LV remodelling occurred in 36% and 35% of diabetic and non-diabetic patients respectively, and was related to non-viability, whereas viability protected against ongoing LV remodelling, both in diabetic and non-diabetic patients. Viability was the only predictor of survival after revascularisation., Conclusions: Diabetic, viable patients with ischaemic LV dysfunction exhibit improvement in LVEF post-revascularisation with prevention of ongoing LV remodelling, similar to non-diabetic patients. Myocardial viability was also the only predictor of long-term outcome.

Objective: To evaluate the relative merits of viability and ischaemia for prognosis after revascularisation., Methods: Low-high dose dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) was performed before revascularisation in 128 consecutive patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy (mean (SD) left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 31 (8)%). Viability (defined as contractile reserve (CR)) and ischaemia were assessed during low and high dose dobutamine infusion, respectively. Cardiac death was evaluated during a five year follow up. Clinical, angiographic, and echocardiographic data were analysed to identify predictors of events., Results: Univariable predictors of cardiac death were the presence of multivessel disease (hazard ratio (HR) 0.21, p < 0.001), baseline LVEF (HR 0.90, p < 0.0001), wall motion score index (WMSI) at rest (HR 4.02, p = 0.0006), low dose DSE (HR 7.01, p < 0.0001), peak dose DSE (HR 4.62, p < 0.0001), the extent of scar (HR 1.39, p < 0.0001), and the presence of CR in > or = 25% of dysfunctional segments (HR 0.34, p = 0.02). The best multivariable model to predict cardiac death included the presence of multivessel disease, WMSI at low dose DSE, and the presence of CR in > or = 25% of the severely dysfunctional segments (HR 9.62, p < 0.0001). Inclusion of ischaemia in the model did not provide additional predictive value., Conclusion: The findings of the present study illustrate that in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy, the extent of viability (CR) is a strong predictor of long term prognosis after revascularisation. Ischaemia did not add significantly in predicting outcome.

Previous studies have shown a good outcome for patients who present with normal findings on stress myocardial perfusion imaging. Currently, the prognostic implications of a normal study in patients who have a history of coronary artery disease (CAD) are not clear. This study investigated the long-term prognosis after a normal finding on stress technetium-99m (Tc-99m)-tetrofosmin single-photon emission computed tomography in patients with a history of CAD. The study included 147 consecutive patients with a history of CAD (previous myocardial infarction and/or myocardial revascularization), who underwent exercise bicycle or high-dose dobutamine-atropine stress Tc-99m-tetrofosmin single-photon emission computed tomography, and had normal perfusion results during stress and at rest. Follow-up was completed in all patients. During a follow-up of 6.5 +/- 1.9 years, 20 patients (14%) died, 10 (7%) of whom died due to cardiac causes, and 12 (8%) had a nonfatal myocardial infarction. Annual cardiac death rates were 0.5% during the first 3 years of follow-up and 1.3% in the subsequent 3 years. Independent predictors of cardiac death were male gender, rate-pressure product at rest, and rate-pressure product at peak stress. In conclusion, patients who have a history of CAD have a very low cardiac death rate during the 3 years after a normal finding on stress Tc-99m-tetrofosmin single-photon emission computed tomography. Repeated testing should be reconsidered 3 years after the initial evaluation and when a change in symptoms or clinical condition occurs.

In the present study, the relation between improvement in the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and heart failure symptoms was evaluated in 100 patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy undergoing coronary revascularization. In patients with viable myocardium, the improvement in the LVEF after revascularization was accompanied by improvement in heart failure symptoms in most patients (80%); most viable patients (75%) without improvement in LVEF also showed an improvement in New York Heart Association functional class. Conversely, most nonviable patients failed to improve in LVEF or New York Heart Association class.

Objective: To evaluate prospectively the response of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) to high dose dobutamine infusion in patients showing substantial viability, with and without improved resting LVEF after revascularisation., Methods: Before and 9-12 months after revascularisation, 50 patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy (LVEF 32 (8)%) and substantial myocardial viability (> or = 4 viable segments) underwent radionuclide ventriculography and dobutamine stress echocardiography. Patients were divided into group 1, patients with, and group 2, patients without significant improvement in resting LVEF (> or = 5% by radionuclide ventriculography) after revascularisation. The response of LVEF during dobutamine stress echocardiography was compared in these two groups., Results: Groups 1 and 2 were comparable in baseline characteristics, resting LVEF, and number of viable segments (mean (SD) 7 (4) v 6 (2), not significant). After revascularisation, the LVEF response during dobutamine stress echocardiography improved significantly in both groups (group 1, 34 (10)% to 56 (8)%; group 2, 32 (10)% to 46 (11)%; both p < 0.001). Interestingly, although resting LVEF did not improve in group 2, peak stress LVEF after revascularisation did (p < 0.001). Group 1 patients had, however, a greater increase in peak stress LVEF (group 1, 22 (10)%; group 2, 13 (9)%; p < 0.01). New York Heart Association and Canadian Cardiovascular Society classes decreased in both groups., Conclusions: Although patients with viable myocardium did not always have improved rest LVEF after revascularisation, peak stress LVEF improved. Assessment of improvement of resting function may not be the ideal end point to evaluate successful revascularisation.

Background: In patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, left ventricular (LV) remodeling is an important prognostic indicator. The precise relation between viable myocardium, revascularization, and ongoing or reversed remodeling is unknown and was evaluated in the present study., Methods and Results: A total of 100 patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy underwent dobutamine stress echocardiography to assess myocardial viability and LV geometry (volumes and shape). At a mean of 10.2 months and 4.5 years after revascularization, resting echocardiography was repeated to evaluate LV remodeling. Long-term follow-up (mean 5+/-2 years) data were obtained. According to dobutamine stress echocardiography, 44 patients (44%) were defined as viable (> or =4 viable segments) and 56 as nonviable. After revascularization, 40 patients (43%) had ongoing LV remodeling and 53 (57%) did not (in 7 patients who died early after revascularization, postoperative echocardiographic evaluation was not available). On multivariable analysis, the number of viable segments was the only predictor of ongoing LV remodeling (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.75; P<0.0001). The likelihood of LV remodeling decreased as the number of viable segments increased. During the follow-up, reverse remodeling was present in viable patients, whereas in nonviable patients, LV volumes significantly increased, which indicates ongoing LV remodeling. At follow-up, viable patients also showed a persistent improvement of heart failure symptoms and fewer cardiac events than nonviable patients (P<0.05)., Conclusions: In patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, a substantial amount of viable myocardium prevents ongoing LV remodeling after revascularization and is associated with persistent improvement of symptoms and better outcome.

Background: Extensive left ventricular (LV) remodeling may not allow functional recovery after revascularization, despite the presence of viable myocardium., Methods and Results: Seventy-nine consecutive patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (left ventricle ejection fraction [LVEF] 29+/-7%) underwent surgical revascularization. Before revascularization, viability was assessed by metabolic imaging with F18-fluorodeoxyglucose and SPECT. LV volumes and LVEF were assessed by resting echocardiography. LVEF was re-assessed by echocardiography 8 to 12 months after revascularization. Three-year clinical follow-up (events: cardiac death, infarction, and hospitalization for heart failure) was also obtained. Forty-nine patients had substantial viability; 5 died before re-assessment of LVEF. Of the remaining 44 patients, 24 improved > or =5% in LVEF after revascularization, whereas 20 did not improve in LVEF. LV end-systolic volume was the only parameter that was significantly different between the groups (109+/-46 mL for the improvers versus 141+/-31 mL for the nonimprovers; P<0.05). The change in LVEF after revascularization was linearly related to the baseline LV end-systolic volume, with a higher LV end-systolic volume associated with a low likelihood of improvement in LVEF after revascularization. During the 3-year follow-up, the highest event-rate (67%) was observed in patients without viable myocardium with a large LV size, whereas the lowest event rate (5%) was observed in patients with viable myocardium and a small LV size. Intermediate event rates were observed in patients with viable myocardium and a large LV size (38%), and in patients without viable myocardium and a small LV size (24%)., Conclusions: Extensive LV remodeling prohibits improvement in LVEF after revascularization and affects long-term prognosis negatively, despite the presence of viability.

Objective: To assess the prognostic value of dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) in patients with previous myocardial revascularisation., Design: Prospective study., Setting: Tertiary referral centre in Rotterdam, the Netherlands., Patients: 332 consecutive patients with previous percutaneous or surgical coronary revascularisation underwent DSE. Follow up was successful for 331 (99.7%) patients. Thirty eight patients who underwent early revascularisation (

Objective: To evaluate the potential of a simple and widely available technique as two-dimensional (2D) echocardiography to identify patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and low likelihood of functional recovery after coronary revascularization., Methods: Two-dimensional echocardiography and radionuclide ventriculography (RNV) were performed before coronary revascularization in 94 patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was measured by RNV. Regional wall motion abnormalities, wall motion score index, end-diastolic wall thickness (EDWT), left ventricular (LV) volumes and LV sphericity index were assessed in the echocardiographic images. RNV was repeated 9-12 months after revascularization to assess LVEF change; an improvement >or=5% was considered clinically significant., Results: Nine hundred and ninety-nine segments were severely dysfunctional; 149 out of 999 (15%) had an EDWT or=100 ml/ml) and of the end-systolic volume index (>or=80 ml) was present in 32 (34%) and 21 (22%) patients, respectively. A spherical shape of the LV was observed in 35 (37%) patients. LVEF after revascularization increased in 30 out of 94 patients (32%) from 30+/-8% to 39+/-9% (P<0.0001). On multivariate analysis, the EDVI was the only predictor of no recovery in LVEF [odds ratio, 1.06, confidence interval (CI), 1.04-1.1, P<0.0001]. The cut-off value of EDVI >or=90 ml/ml accurately identified patients that virtually never recover. Post-operatively, LVEF increased in three out of 42 (7%, 95% CI 0-15%) patients with EDVI >or=90 ml/ml as compared to 27 out of 52 (52%) patients with EDVI<90 ml/ml (P<0.0001)., Conclusions: In patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and severe LV enlargement, improvement of LVEF after revascularization is unlikely to occur. Conversely, in patients with relatively preserved LV size, a higher likelihood of functional recovery may be anticipated.

Objective: In patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and a substantial amount of dysfunctional but viable myocardium, myocardial revascularization may improve left ventricular ejection fraction. The aim of this study was to evaluate why not all patients with a substantial amount of viable tissue recover in function after revascularization., Methods: A total of 118 consecutive patients with a depressed left ventricular ejection fraction (on average 29% +/- 6%) due to chronic coronary artery disease underwent myocardial revascularization. Before revascularization all patients underwent dobutamine stress echocardiography to assess regional dysfunction, left ventricular volumes, and myocardial viability as well as radionuclide ventriculography to determine the left ventricular ejection fraction. Next, 3 to 6 months after revascularization, the left ventricular ejection fraction and regional contractile function were reassessed. Improvement of left ventricular ejection fraction > or = 5% following revascularization was considered clinically significant., Results: Dobutamine stress echocardiography revealed that 489 (37%) of the 1329 dysfunctional segments were viable. A total of 61 (52%) patients had a substantial amount of viable myocardium (> or = 4 viable segments). In these 61 patients the global function was expected to recover > or = 5% after revascularization. However, left ventricular ejection fraction did not improve in 20 (33%) of 61 patients despite the presence of substantial viability. Clinical characteristics and echocardiographic data were comparable between patients with and without improvement. However, patients without improvement had considerably larger end systolic volumes (153 +/- 41 mL vs 133 +/- 46 mL, P =.007). The likelihood of recovery of global function decreased proportionally with the increase of end systolic volume (P <.001, R = 0.43, n = 61). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis demonstrated that an end systolic volume > or = 140 mL had the highest sensitivity/specificity to predict the absence of global recovery., Conclusions: In patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy not only the amount of dysfunctional but viable myocardium but also the extent of left ventricular remodeling determines the improvement in function following myocardial revascularization. Patients with a high end systolic volume due to left ventricular remodeling have a decreased likelihood of improvement of global function.

Background: Patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and viable myocardium may improve in function and prognosis following revascularization. Delayed revascularization may result in less favorable outcome, and therefore the impact of timing of revascularization on long-term outcome was evaluated., Methods and Results: Patients (n=85) with ischemic cardiomyopathy and substantial viability (>or=25% of the left ventricle) on dobutamine stress echocardiography underwent surgical revascularization. Based on the waiting time for revascularization, patients were divided into 2 groups: early (1 month) revascularization. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was assessed before and 9 to 12 months after revascularization; follow-up data were acquired up to 2 years after revascularization. Hence, 40 patients underwent early (20+/-12 days) and 45 late (85+/-47 days) revascularization. Baseline characteristics of the two groups were comparable. Preoperative deaths were 0 in the early and 2 in the late group. Patients with early revascularization remained shorter time in the intensive care unit (2.4+/-1.5 days versus 5.9+/-2.1 days for the late group, P<0.05). Low output syndrome was observed more frequently in the late group (8% versus 22%, P=0.06). On long-term follow-up, mortality (5% versus 20%, P<0.05) and re-hospitalization for heart failure (10% versus 24%, NS) were higher in the late group. LVEF improved from 28+/-9% to 40+/-12% (P<0.05) in the early group and remained unchanged in the late group (27+/-10% versus 25+/-7%, NS)., Conclusions: Patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and viable myocardium benefit from early revascularization (with improvement in LVEF and favorable prognosis), whereas delayed revascularization of these patients is associated with worse outcome.

Currently, the prediction of improvement of left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) after revascularization in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy relies only on viable myocardium extent, whereas both the amount of viable and scar tissue may be important. A model was developed, based on the amount of viable and nonviable myocardium, to predict functional recovery. Viable and scarred myocardium was defined by dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) in 108 consecutive patients. LVEF before and 9 to 12 months after revascularization was assessed by radionuclide ventriculography; an improvement of > or =5% was considered significant. In the 1,089 dysfunctional segments (63%), DSE elicited biphasic response in 216 segments (20%), sustained improvement in 205 (19%), worsening in 43 (4%), and no change in 625 (57%). LVEF improved in 39 patients (36%). Only the numbers of biphasic and scar segments were predictors of improvement or no improvement of LVEF (odds ratio 1.5, 95% confidence interval 1.2 to 1.7, p <0.0001 for biphasic segments; odds ratio 0.8, 95% confidence interval 0.7 to 0.9, p <0.0005 for scarred segments). The sustained improvement and worsening pattern were not predictive of improvement or no improvement. A regression function, based on the number of scar and biphasic segments, showed that the likelihood of recovery was 85% in patients with extensive biphasic tissue and no scars and 11% in patients with extensive scars and no biphasic myocardium. Patients with a mixture of scar and biphasic tissue had an intermediate likelihood of improvement (50%). In patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and a mixture of viable and nonviable tissue, both numbers of viable and nonviable segments should be considered to accurately predict functional recovery after revascularization.

Background: Repeat coronary artery bypass grafting (redo-CABG) in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy is associated with high perioperative risk and worse long-term outcome compared with patients undergoing their first CABG. Objective: To assess whether patients with viable myocardium undergoing redo-CABG have a better outcome. Methods: 18 patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy underwent redo-CABG and 34 underwent their first CABG; all had substantial viability (⩾25% of the left ventricle) on dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and heart failure symptoms were assessed before and 9–12 months after revascularisation. Cardiac event rate was assessed during the follow-up period (median 4 years, 25–75th centile 2.8–4.9 years). Results: The extent of viable myocardium on DSE was comparable in the two groups (11.3 (3.9) segments in patients who underwent redo-CABG v 12.8 (3.0) in patients who underwent their first CABG; p = NS). LVEF improved from 32% (9%) to 39% (12%); p=0.01, in patients who underwent redo-CABG and from 30% (7%) to 36% (7%); p<0.01, in those who underwent their first CABG; New York Heart Association class improved from 2.5 (1.1) to 1.9 (0.8); p=0.03, and from 2.7 (1.0) to 1.8 (0.70); p<0.01, respectively. In patients who underwent redo-CABG, the perioperative mortality was 0, post-surgery inotropic support was needed in 11% of the patients and mid-term (4-year) survival was 100%, with a total event rate of 28%. All these variables were not statistically different from patients who underwent their first CABG (p = 0.50, 0.90, 0.08 and 0.81, respectively). Conclusion: Patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy and substantial viability undergoing redo-CABG benefit from revascularisation in terms of improvement in LVEF, heart failure symptoms, angina and mid-term prognosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To compare the long term prognosis of patients having silent versus symptomatic ischaemia during dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE). Design: Observational study. Setting: Tertiary referral centre. Patients: 931 patients who experienced stress induced myocardial ischaemia during DSE. Results: Silent ischaemia was present in 643 of 931 patients (69%). The number of dysfunctional segments at rest (mean (SD) 9.6 (5.1) v 8.8 (5.0), p = 0.1) and of ischaemic segments (3.5 (2.2) v 3.8 (2.1), p = 0.2) was comparable in both groups. During a mean (SD) follow up of 5.5 (3.3) years, there were 169 (18%) cardiac deaths and 86 (9%) non-fatal infarctions. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed age (hazard ratio (FIR) 1.1, 95% confidence interval (Cl) 1.02 to 1.05), previous myocardial infarction (HR 1.4, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.0), and number of ischaemic segments during the test (HR 2.0, 95% CI 1.0 to 3.7) as independent predictors of cardiac death and myocardial infarction. For every additional ischaemic segment there was a twofold increment in risk of late cardiac events. The annual cardiac death or myocardial infarction rate was 3.0% in patients with symptomatic ischaemia and 4.6% in patients with silent ischaemia (p <0.01). Silent induced ischaemia was an independent predictor of cardiac death and myocardial infarction (HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.0). During follow up symptomatic patients were treated more often with cardioprotective therapy (p <0.01) and coronary revascularisation (145 of 288 (50%) v 174 of 643 (27%), p <0.001). Conclusions: Patients with silent ischaemia had a similar extent of myocardial ischaemia during DSE compared to patients with symptomatic ischaemia but received less cardioprotective treatment and coronary revascularisation and experienced a higher cardiac event rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy and viable myocardium, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) does not always improve after revascularisation. Whether this may affect prognosis is unclear. Objective: To evaluate the prognosis of viable patients with and without improvement of LVEF after coronary revascularisation. Methods: Before revascularisation, radionuclide ventriculography (RNV) and dobutamine stress echocardiography were performed to assess LVEF and myocardial viability, respectively. Nine to 12 months after revascularisation, LVEF improvement was assessed by RNV. Patients were divided into three groups: group 1, viable patients with LVEF improvement (n = 27); group 2, viable patients without LVEF improvement (n = 15), group 3, non-viable patients (n = 48). Cardiac events were evaluated during a 4-year follow-up. Results: After revascularisation, the mean (SD) LVEF improved from 32 (9)% to 42 (10)% in group 1, but did not change significantly in group 2 and in group 3, p<0.001 by analysis of variance (ANOVA). Heart failure symptoms improved in both groups 1 (mean (SD) NYHA class from 3.1 (0.9) to 1.7 (0.7)) and 2 (from 3.2 (0.7) to 1.7 (0.9)), but not in group 3 (from 2.8 (1.0) to 2.7 (0.5)), p<0.001 by ANOVA. During follow-up, the cardiac event rate was low (4%) in group 1, intermediate (21%) in group 2 and high (33%) in group 3 (p = 0.01). Conclusion: The best prognosis after revascularisation may be expected in those viable patients whose LVEF improves. Conversely, viable patients without functional improvement have an intermediate prognosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An abstract of the article "Can We Predict Better Functional Recovery After Coronary Revascularization in Mildly Hypokinetic Segments?" by V. Rizzello and colleagues is presented.

An abstract of the article "Can resting 2D echocardiography identify patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and low likelihood of functional improvement after revascularization?" by V. Rizzello and colleagues is presented.

An abstract of the article "Beneficial Effects of Coronary Revascularization on Left Ventricular Remodelling in Patients With Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: The Role of Viable Myocardium" by V. Rizzello and colleagues is presented.

An abstract of the article "Do All Patients with Ischemic Heart Failure and a Substantial Amount of Viable Myocardium Recover in Function After Myocardial Revascularization" by A. F. L. Schinkel and colleagues is presented.