Krejca, Michał

Objectives To define the prognostic contribution of global and regional left ventricular (LV) function measurements in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy randomised to coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) with (n=501) or without (n=499) surgical ventricular reconstruction (SVR). Methods Novel multivariable methods to analyse global and regional LV systolic function were used to better formulate prediction models for long-term mortality following CABG with or without SVR in the entire cohort of 1000 randomised SVR hypothesis patients. Key clinical variables were included in the analysis. Regional function was classified according to the discreteness of anteroapical hypokinesia and akinesia into those most likely to benefit from SVR, those least likely and those felt to have intermediate likelihood of benefit from SVR. Results The most prognostic clinical variables identified in multivariable models include creatinine, LV end-systolic volume index (ESVI), age and NYHA (New York Heart Association) class. Addition of LV ejection fraction, LV end-diastolic volume index and regional function assessment did not contribute additional power to the model. Subgroup analysis based on regional function did not identify a cohort in which SVR improved mortality. Conclusions ESVI is the single parameter of LV function most predictive of mortality in patients with LV systolic dysfunction following CABG with or without SVR in multivariable models that include all key clinical and LV systolic function parameters. Assessment of regional cardiac function does not enhance prediction of mortality nor identify a subgroup for which SVR improves mortality. These results do not support elective addition of LV reconstruction surgery in patients undergoing CABG. Trial registration number NCT00023595.

Background— Whether mitral valve repair during coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) improves survival in patients with ischemic mitral regurgitation (MR) remains unknown. Methods and Results— Patients with ejection fraction ≤35% and coronary artery disease amenable to CABG were randomized at 99 sites worldwide to medical therapy with or without CABG. The decision to treat the mitral valve during CABG was left to the surgeon. The primary end point was mortality. Of 1212 randomized patients, 435 (36%) had none/trace MR, 554 (46%) had mild MR, 181 (15%) had moderate MR, and 39 (3%) had severe MR. In the medical arm, 70 deaths (32%) occurred in patients with none/trace MR, 114 (44%) in those with mild MR, and 58 (50%) in those with moderate to severe MR. In patients with moderate to severe MR, there were 29 deaths (53%) among 55 patients randomized to CABG who did not receive mitral surgery (hazard ratio versus medical therapy, 1.20; 95% confidence interval, 0.77–1.87) and 21 deaths (43%) among 49 patients who received mitral surgery (hazard ratio versus medical therapy, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.35–1.08). After adjustment for baseline prognostic variables, the hazard ratio for CABG with mitral surgery versus CABG alone was 0.41 (95% confidence interval, 0.22–0.77; P =0.006). Conclusion— Although these observational data suggest that adding mitral valve repair to CABG in patients with left ventricular dysfunction and moderate to severe MR may improve survival compared with CABG alone or medical therapy alone, a prospective randomized trial is necessary to confirm the validity of these observations. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00023595.