Advertisement

Coronary Artery Bypass for Ischemic Cardiomyopathy

  • Bartley P. Griffith
Chapter

Abstract

Since Favaloro introduced coronary artery bypass grafting in 1969,1 results have improved steadily even though the procedure has been applied to more patients that are older, with more extensive disease, and worse left ventricular function.2 In spite of recent success of percutaneous angioplasty for multi-vessel disease and relatively normal left ventricles, bypass surgery has been preferred for those with three-vessel disease and severe left ventricular dysfunction.3–6 Evidence for the role of surgical revascularization in patients with symptomatic diffuse coronary artery disease and impaired left ventricles was first noted in the 1984 report of the Veterans Administration Cooperative Trial7 that demonstrated an 11-year survival advantage over medical therapy of 12% (50% vs. 38%). The definition of abnormal left ventricle was generous by today’s surgical standards and included ejection fraction of 40% or below and included only patients with stable angina.This study was reinforced by the CASS report in 1985,8 and The Veterans Administration Medical Center’s results were similar when extended to patients with an unstable pattern of angina.9

Keywords

Coronary Artery Bypass Myocardial Viability Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Ischemic Cardiomyopathy Coronary Artery Surgery Study 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Favaloro RG. Saphenous vein graft in the surgical treatment of coronary artery disease: Operative technique. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1969;58:178–89.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Califf RM, Harrell FE, Lee KL, et al. The evolution of medical and surgical therapy for coronary artery disease. JAMA 1989;261:2077–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    King SB III, Lembo NJ, Wointraub WS, et al. A randomized trial comparing coronary angioplasty with coronary artery bypass surgery. N Engl J Med 1994;334:1044–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hamm CW, Reimer SJ, Ischinger T et al. A randomized study of coronary angioplasty compared with bypass surgery in patients with symptomatic multi-vessel coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 1994;331:1037–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    O’Keefe JH Jr, Allan JJ, McCallister BD, et al. Angioplasty versus bypass surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease with left ventricular ejection fraction _40%. Am J Cardiol 1993;71:897–901.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Holmes DR Jr, Detre KM, Williams DO, et al. Long-term outcome of patients with depressed left ventricular function undergoing percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Circulation 193;87:21–29.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    The Veterans Administration Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Cooperative Study Group. Eleven-year survival in the Veteran Administration randomized trial of coronary bypass surgery for stable angina. N Engl J Med 1984;311:1333–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coronary artery surgery study (CASS): A randomized trial of coronary artery bypass surgery. Survival data. Circulation 1983;68:939–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Luchi RJ, Scott SM, Deupree RH, et al. Comparison of medical and surgical treatment for unstable angina pectoris. Results of a VA cooperative study. N Engl J Med 1987;316:977–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hattler BG, Madia C, Johnson C, et al. Risk stratification using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons program. Ann Thorac Surg 1995;58:1348–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lansman SL, Cohen M, Galla JD, et al. Coronary bypass with ejection fraction of 0.20 or less using centigrade cardioplegia: Long-term follow-up. Ann Thorac Surg 1993;56:480–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kron IL, Flanagan TL, Blackbourne LH, Schroder RA, Nolan SR Coronary revascularization rather than cardiac transplantation for chronic ischemic cardiomyopathy. Ann Surg 1989;210:348–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schelbert, HR. Metabolic imaging to assess myocardial viability. J Nucl Med 1994 35(4 Suppl):8S–14S.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zaret MD, Wackers FJ: Nuclear cardiology. N Engl J Med 1993;329:775–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dilsizian V, Bonow RO: Current diagnostic techniques of assessing myocardial viability in patients with hibernating and stunned myocardium. Circulation 1993;87:1–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ragosta M, Beller GA, Watson DD, Kaul S, Gimple LW. Quantitative planar rest-redistribution 201TI imaging in detection of myocardial viability and prediction of improvement in left ventricular function after coronary bypass surgery in patients with severely depressed left ventricular function. Circulation 1993;87(5): 1630–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Milano CA, White WD, Smith LR, Jones RH, et al. Coronary artery bypass in patients with severely depressed ventricular function. Ann Thorac Surg 1993;56:487–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hausmann H, Warnecke H, Schiessler A, et al. Predictors of survival in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction of 10–30% receiving coronary artery bypass grafting: Analysis of preoperative variables in 177 patients. Circulation 1991;84(2):284.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Elefteriades JA, Tolis G Jr., Levi E, et al. Coronary artery bypass grafting in severe left ventricular dysfunction: Excellent survival with improved ejection fraction and functional state. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993;22:1411–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Langenburg SE, Buchanan SB, Blackbourne LH, Scheri R, Shockey K, Martinez-Leon J, Tribble CG, Kron IL: Predicting survival after coronary revascularization for ischemic cardiomyopathy. Ann Thorac Surg 1995 (in press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Luciani GB, Faggian G, Razzolini R, et al. Severe ischemic left ventricular failure: Coronary operation or heart transplantation? Ann Thorac Surg 1993;55:719–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dreyfus GD, Duboc D, Blasco A, et al. Myocardial viability assessment in ischemic cardiomyopathy: Benefits of coronary revascularization. Ann Thorac Surg 1994;57:1402–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bartley P. Griffith
    • 1
  1. 1.University of PittsburghPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations