Do Patients With Non-Viable Myocardium From Ischemic Cardiomyopathy Benefit From Revascularization? A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND

Myocardial viability assessment is used to select patients who will derive the greatest benefit from revascularization. It remains controversial whether revascularization only benefits patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy who have viable myocardium. The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare mortality between patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and non-viable myocardium who underwent revascularization and those who underwent medical therapy alone.

METHODS

The MEDLINE database was searched using PubMed to retrieve studies published up to December 2021. Inclusion criteria were 1. studies that evaluated the impact of revascularization (revascularization group) versus medical therapy alone (control group) following myocardial viability assessment; 2. patients who had coronary artery disease that was amenable to coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous coronary intervention; and 3. patients who had non-viable myocardium. The main outcome measure was all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 12 studies were included, evaluating 1363 patients with non-viable myocardium, of whom 501 patients underwent revascularization and 862 patients received medical therapy alone. There was a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (RR 0.76, 95 % CI: 0.62-0.93, I = 0) in the revascularization group compared to the control group. There was no association between the type of viability imaging modality and the risk of all-cause mortality (P-interaction = 0.58).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this meta-analysis suggest a benefit from revascularization compared to medical therapy in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy despite the lack of myocardial viability.