Garatti Andrea, Castelvecchio Serenella, Canziani Alberto, Santoro Tiberio, Menicanti Lorenzo
Department of Cardiovascular Disease "E. Malan", Cardiac Surgery Unit, IRCCS Policlinico S. Donato Hospital, San Donato Milanese, Via Morandi 30, 20097 Milan, Italy.
Division of Cardiology, Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza, San Giovanni Rotondo, Foggia, Italy.
Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2018 Dec;34(Suppl 3):279-286. doi: 10.1007/s12055-018-0738-8. Epub 2018 Oct 17.
Ischemic chronic heart failure (CHF) represents one of the cardiovascular diseases with the worst degree of morbidity and mortality in the western world, and with the highest health care costs. Despite several studies demonstrated that surgical revascularization (CABG), especially in the presence of viable myocardium, improve heart function, and therefore, survival, the matter remains unclear and controversial. In the late 1970s, the Coronary Artery Surgery Study showed that a subgroup of patients with coronary artery disease, angina, and reduce LV function had a significant survival benefit after CABG compared to those treated medically. The key concept behind this observation was the presence of viable myocardium, which can resume function following revascularization. In contrary, the surgical treatment for ischemic heart failure (STICH) trial, which randomized patients with CAD and LV dysfunction to evidence-based medical therapy or CABG plus medical therapy, failed to demonstrate at a median follow-up of 56 months a significant difference between the CABG group and the medical therapy group in the rate of death from any cause. However, the results of the STICH extension study (STICHES) at 10 years follow-up demonstrated that CABG is associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and readmission for heart compared to optimal medical therapy (OMT) in patients with severe ischemic LV dysfunction. Therefore, this review discusses the available evidences in literature, from observational studies to randomized trials, including operative techniques and controversial issues, in order to better clarify the role of CABG in the current management of ischemic patients with LVD.
缺血性慢性心力衰竭(CHF)是西方世界发病率和死亡率最高、医疗成本最高的心血管疾病之一。尽管多项研究表明,外科血运重建术(冠状动脉旁路移植术,CABG),尤其是在存在存活心肌的情况下,可改善心脏功能,从而提高生存率,但此事仍不明确且存在争议。20世纪70年代末,冠状动脉外科研究表明,与接受药物治疗的患者相比,一组患有冠状动脉疾病、心绞痛且左心室功能降低的患者在接受CABG后有显著的生存获益。这一观察结果背后的关键概念是存在存活心肌,其在血运重建后可恢复功能。相反,缺血性心力衰竭外科治疗(STICH)试验将患有冠心病和左心室功能障碍的患者随机分为循证药物治疗组或CABG加药物治疗组,在中位随访56个月时,未能证明CABG组和药物治疗组在任何原因导致的死亡率方面存在显著差异。然而,STICH扩展研究(STICHES)在10年随访时的结果表明,对于严重缺血性左心室功能障碍的患者,与最佳药物治疗(OMT)相比,CABG与全因死亡率、心血管死亡率和心脏再入院率的显著降低相关。因此,本综述讨论了文献中从观察性研究到随机试验的现有证据,包括手术技术和有争议的问题,以便更好地阐明CABG在当前缺血性左心室功能障碍患者管理中的作用。