Current Heart Failure Reports

, Volume 2, Issue 1, pp 46–53 | Cite as

A heart failure specialist’s perspective on cardiac surgery for heart failure

  • Carl V. Leier


Aside from cardiac transplantation, ventricular assist devices, and the total artificial heart, cardiac surgery now also plays a major role in the overall management of the heart failure patient. For patients with heart failure, cardiac surgery has steadily moved from being a predominant rescue procedure (eg, aneursymectomy, rupture repair, transplantation) to surgical interventions that can prevent or delay the progression of cardiac dysfunction and failure; these operations now include coronary artery bypass surgery, ventricular restoration, and valvular repair/replacement. This article discusses the role and impact of these specific surgical interventions in the setting of ventricular dysfunction and heart failure.

References and Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Massad MG, ed: Surgical options for the management of congestive heart failure. Cardiology 2004, 101(theme issue):1–155. This entire issue is dedicated to the surgical interventions of potential benefit for patients with established heart failure. Multiple authors, most leaders in the field and in the specific topic addressed, contributed to the issue. The topics are covered in reasonable depth.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Morrison DA, Sethi G, Sachs J, et al.: Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery surgery for patients with medically refractory myocardial ischemia and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass: a multicenter, randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001, 38:143–149.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Veterans Administration Coronary Artery Bypass Cooperative Study Group: Eleven-year survival in the Veterans Administration randomized trial of coronary bypass surgery for stable angina. N Engl J Med 1984, 311:1333–1339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Killip T, Passamani E, Davis K, et al.: Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Study (CASS): a randomized trial of coronary bypass surgery. Eight years follow-up and survival in patients with reduced ejection fraction. Circulation 1985, 72:V102-V109.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sim I, Gupta M, McDonald K, et al.: Meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing coronary artery bypass grafting with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in multi-vessel coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 1995, 76:1025–1029.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Caines AEB, Massad MG, Kpodonu J, et al.: Outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention and medical therapy for multivessel disease with and without left ventricular dysfunction. Cardiology 2004, 101:21–28. This article presents a comprehensive and reasonably objective overview of CABG versus PCI, but much of the information applies to patients with normal LV systolic function and was obtained before drug-eluting stents were available for study.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chaitman BR, Rosen AD, Williams DO, et al.: Myocardial infarction and cardiac mortality in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) randomized trial. Circulation 1997, 96:2162–2170.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Serruys P, Unger F, Sousa JE, et al.: Comparison of coronary bypass surgery and stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease. N Engl J Med 2001, 344:1117–1124.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Toda K, MacKenzie K, Mehra M, et al.: Revascularization in severe ventricular dysfunction (15% < LVEF < 30%): a comparison of bypass grafting and percutaneous intervention. Ann Thorac Surg 2002, 74:2082–2087.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Iskandrian AS, Heo J, Schelbert HR: Myocardial viability: methods of assessment and clinical relevance. Am HeartJ 1996, 132:1226–1235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Committee to Update the 1999 Guidelines for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: ACC/AHA 2004 Guideline update for coronary artery bypass graft surgery: summary article. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004, 44:1146–1154. This guidelines summary addresses the wide spectrum of patient groups, including those with LV dysfunction, placed under consideration for coronary artery bypass surgery.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    White HD, Norris RM, Brown MA, et al.: Left ventricular end-systolic volume as the major determinant of survival after recovery from myocardial infarction. Circulation 1987, 76:44–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee TH, Hamilton MA, Stevenson LW, et al.: Impact of left ventricular cavity size on survival in advanced heart failure. AmJ Cardiol 1993, 72:672–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jantene AD: Left ventricular aneurysmectomy or reconstruction? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1985, 89:321–331.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Di Donato M, Sabatier M, DorV, et al.: Akinetic versus dyskinetic postinfarction scar: relation to surgical outcome in patients undergoing endoventricular patch plasty repair. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997, 29:1569–1575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    DorV, Sabatier M, Di Donato M, et al.: Efficacy of endoventricular patch plasty in large postinfarction akinetic scar and severe left ventricular dysfunction: comparison with a series of large dyskinetic scars. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998, 116:50–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Di Donato M, Toso A, Maioli M, et al.: Intermediate survival and predictors of death after surgical ventricular restoration. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2001, 13:468–475.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Athanasuleas CL, Stanley AWH, Buckberg GD, et al.: Surgical anterior ventricular endocardial restoration [SAVER] in the dilated remodeled ventricle after anterior myocardial infarction. RESTORE Group. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001, 37:1199–1209.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    McConnell PI, Michler RE: Clinical trials in the surgical management of congestive heart failure: surgical ventricular restoration and autologous skeletal myoblast and stem cell cardiomyoplasty. Cardiology 2004, 101:48–60. This is a concise, well-referenced presentation of surgical ventricular restoration (with vivid illustrations) and the STICH trial.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lee R, Hoercher KJ, McCarthy PM: Ventricular restoration surgery for congestive heart failure. Cardiology 2004, 101:61–71. This is a comprehensive treatise on historical aspects and the current status of ventricular surgery for heart failure.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dor V: Left ventricular aneurysms: the endoventricular circular patch plasty. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1997, 9:123–130.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Conte JV: Surgical ventricular restoration: techniques and outcomes. Congest Heart Fail 2004, 10:248–251.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bolling SF, Deeb GM, Brunsting LA, Bach DS: Early outcome of mitral valve reconstruction in patients with end-stage cardiomyopathy. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1995, 109:676–683.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bolling S, Pagani F, Deeb G, Bach D: Intermediate-term outcome of mitral reconstruction in cardiomyopathy. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1998, 115:381–388.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bishay ES, McCarthy PM, Cosgrove DM, et al.: Mitral valve surgery in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2000, 17:213–221.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Szalay ZA, Civelek A, Hobe S, et al.: Mitral annuloplasty in patients with ischemic versus dilated cardiomyopathy. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2003, 4:567–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sarris GE, Cahill PD, Hansen DE, et al.: Restoration of left ventricular systolic performance after reattachment of the mitral chordae tendinae. The importance of valvular-ventricular interaction. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1988, 95:969–979.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Menicanti L, Di Donato M, Frigiola A, et al.: Ischemic mitral regurgitation: intraventricular papillary muscle imbrication without mitral ring during left ventricular restoration. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002, 123:1041–1050.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Geha AS, El-Zein C, Massad MG: Mitral valve surgery in patients with ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy. Cardiology 2004, 101:15–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rothenburger M, Rukosujew A, Hammel D, et al.: Mitral valve surgery in patients with poor left ventricular function. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002, 6:351–354.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bax JJ, Braun J, Somer ST, et al.: Restrictive annuloplasty and coronary revascularization in ischemic mitral regurgitation results in reverse left ventricular remodeling. Circulation 2004, 110(Suppl II):II–103-II-108.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Paul S, Mihaljevic T, Rawn JD, et al.: Aortic valve replacement in patients with severely reduced left ventricular function. Cardiology 2004, 101:7–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Carabello BA, Green LH, Grossman W, et al.: Hemodynamic determinants of prognosis of aortic valve replacement in critical aortic stenosis and advanced congestive heart failure. Circulation 1980, 62:42–48.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Obadia JF, Eker A, Rescigno G, et al.: Valvular replacement for aortic stenosis on patients with NYHA class III and IV. Early and long term results. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 1995, 36:251–256.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Connolly HM, Oh JK, Orszulak TA, et al.: Aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis with left ventricular dysfunction. Prognostic indicators. Circulation 1997, 95:2395–2400.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Connolly HM, Oh JK, Schaff HV, et al.: Severe aortic stenosis with low transvavular gradient and severe left ventricular dysfunction: result of aortic valve replacement in 52 patients. Circulation 2000, 101:1940–1946.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Powell DE, Tunick PA, Rosenzweig BP, et al.: Aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic stenosis and severe left ventricular dysfunction. Arch Intern Med 2000, 160:1337–1341.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Monin JL, Monchi M, Gest V, et al.: Aortic stenosis with severe left ventricular dysfunction and low transvalvular pressure gradients: risk stratification by low dose dobutamine echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001, 37:2101–2107.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pereira JJ, Lauer MS, Bashir M, et al.: Survival after aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis and low transvalvular gradients and severe left ventricular dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002, 39:1356–1363.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    deFilippi CR, Willett DL, Brickner ME, et al.: Usefulness of dobutamine echocardiography in distinguishing severe from nonsevere valvular aortic stenosis in patients with depressed left ventricular function and low transvalvular gradients. Am J Cardiol 1995, 75:191–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Nishimura RA, Grantham JA, Connelly HM, et al.: Low-output, low-gradient aortic stenosis in patients with depressed left ventricular systolic function: the clinical utility of the dobutamine challenge in the catheterization laboratory. Circulation 2002, 106:809–813.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Khot UN, Novaro GM, Popovic ZB, et al.: Nitroprusside in critically ill patients with left ventricular dysfunction and aortic stenosis. N Engl J Med 2003, 348:1756–1763.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Henry WL, Bonow RO, Borer JS, et al.: Observations on the optimal time for operative intervention for aortic regurgitation. I. Evaluation of the results of aortic valve replacement in symptomatic patients. Circulation 1980, 61:471–483.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Aronow WS, Ahn C, Kronzon I, et al.: Prognosis of patients with heart failure and unoperated aortic valvular regurgitation and relation to ejection fraction. Am J Cardiol 1994, 74:286–288.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Dujardin KS, Enriquez-Sarano M, Schaff HV, et al.: Mortality and morbidity of aortic regurgitation in clinical practice. A long-term follow-up study. Circulation 1999, 99:1851–1857.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Klodas E, Enriquez-Sarano M, Tajik A, et al.: Aortic regurgitation complicated by extreme left ventricular dilation: long-term outcome after surgical correction. J Am Coll Cardiol 1996, 27:670–677.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Klodas E, Enriquez-Sarano M, Tajik AJ, et al.: Optimizing timing of surgical correction in patients with severe aortic regurgitation: role of symptoms. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997, 30:746–752.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Tarasoutchi F, Ginsberg M, Filho JP, et al.: Symptoms, left ventricular function, and timing of valve replacement surgery in patients with aortic regurgitation. Am Heart J 1999, 138:477–485.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Chaliki HP, Mohty D, Avierinos JF, et al.: Outcomes after aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic regurgitation and marked reduced left ventricular function. Circulation 2002, 106:2687–2693.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Current Science Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carl V. Leier
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of CardiologyDavis Heart-Lung Research Institute, The Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations