One-month DAPT with ticagrelor and aspirin for patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting: rationale and design of the randomised, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled ODIN trial.

The optimal antiplatelet strategy after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery in patients with chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) is unclear. Adding the P2Y12 inhibitor, ticagrelor, to low-dose aspirin for 1 year is associated with a reduction in graft failure, particularly saphenous vein grafts, at the expense of an increased risk of clinically important bleeding. As the risk of thrombotic graft failure and ischaemic events is highest early after CABG surgery, a better risk-to-benefit profile may be attained with short-term dual antiplatelet therapy followed by single antiplatelet therapy. The One Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Ticagrelor in Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Patients (ODIN) trial is a prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, international, multicentre study of 700 subjects that will evaluate the effect of short-term dual antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor plus low-dose aspirin after CABG in patients with CCS. Patients will be randomised 1:1 to ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily or matching placebo, in addition to aspirin 75-150 mg once daily for 1 month; after the first month, antiplatelet therapy will be continued with aspirin alone. The primary endpoint is a hierarchical composite of all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction, revascularisation and graft failure at 1 year. The key secondary endpoint is a hierarchical composite of all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction, Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 bleeding, revascularisation and graft failure at 1 year (net clinical benefit). ODIN will report whether the addition of ticagrelor to low-dose aspirin for 1 month after CABG reduces ischaemic events and provides a net clinical benefit in patients with CCS. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05997693).

Multiarterial vs Single-Arterial Coronary Surgery: 10-Year Follow-up of 1 Million Patients.

BACKGROUND: Although many options exist for multivessel coronary revascularization, controversy persists over whether multiarterial grafting (MAG) confers a survival advantage over single-arterial grafting (SAG) with saphenous vein in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). This study sought to compare longitudinal survival between patients undergoing MAG and those undergoing SAG. METHODS: All patients undergoing isolated CABG with ≥2 bypass grafts in The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database (2008-2019) were linked to the National Death Index. Risk adjustment was performed using inverse probability weighting and multivariable modeling. The primary end point was longitudinal survival. Subpopulation analyses were performed and volume thresholds were analyzed to determine optimal benefit. RESULTS: A total of 1,021,632 patients underwent isolated CABG at 1108 programs (100,419 MAG [9.83%]; 920,943 SAG [90.17%]). Median follow-up was 5.30 years (range, 0-12 years). After risk adjustment, all characteristics were well balanced. At 10 years, MAG was associated with improved unadjusted (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI 0.58-0.61) and adjusted (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.85-0.88) 10-year survival. Center volume of ≥10 MAG cases/year was associated with benefit. MAG was associated with an overall survival advantage over SAG in all subgroups, including stable coronary disease, acute coronary syndrome, and acute infarction. Survival was equivalent to that with SAG for patients age ≥80 years and those with severe heart failure, renal failure, peripheral vascular disease, or obesity. Only patients with a body mass index ≥40 kg/m2 had superior survival with SAG. CONCLUSIONS: Multiarterial CABG is associated with superior long-term survival and should be the surgical multivessel revascularization strategy of choice for patients with a body mass index of less than 40 kg/m2.

Less Invasive and Hybrid Surgical/Interventional Coronary Disease Management: The Future Is Now.

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has evolved to become the criterion standard in elective revascularisation for coronary artery disease (CAD), particularly in patients with complex or multivessel CAD, left main involvement, diabetes mellitus, or left ventricular dysfunction. Despite the superiority of CABG in patients with the most advanced forms of CAD, a standard CABG operation, through a median sternotomy and with the use of cardiopulmonary bypass, carries well recognised challenges. In this article, we describe newer approaches, such as off-pump CABG, minimally invasive bypass grafting, robotic CABG, and hybrid coronary revascularisation, which we consider as necessary ways to minimise invasion, reduce recovery time, provide the benefits of arterial grafting to more patients, and offer alternatives to mitigate the adverse effects of conventional sternotomy and cardiopulmonary bypass.

Designing the coronary artery bypass surgery operation of the future.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article discusses current shortcomings in coronary artery bypass surgery and ways to overcome them. RECENT FINDINGS: Minimally invasive coronary bypass surgery, robotic coronary bypass, and hybrid approaches aim to avoid sternotomy, employ arterial grafts, and minimize the use of cardiopulmonary bypass. Other considerations such as bypass graft validation, the optimization of guideline-directed medical therapy, and the development of coronary surgery specialists are also crucial to further the benefits of coronary artery bypass grafting on future patients. SUMMARY: Coronary artery bypass grafting must become less invasive, be better validated, and be carried out with an even higher emphasis on quality, including graft validation and preoperative/postoperative optimization, if it is to remain the best treatment for advanced, severe coronary artery disease.

Optimizing care of patients undergoing cardiac surgery using a digital platform and a multidisciplinary team approach.

OBJECTIVE: Restrictions to care access during the pandemic along with the increasing complexity of patients awaiting cardiac surgery provides unique challenges for care delivery. The University of Ottawa Heart Institute has developed a novel multidisciplinary digital platform, the Prehab Automated Follow-Up (AFU) Program, which delivers patient/caregiver teaching regarding risk factor mitigation, tracks patient symptoms, and screens for optimization using best practice guidelines. This study was conducted to quantify patient outcomes following initiation of the AFU Program. METHODS: Patients awaiting elective cardiac surgery are enrolled and screened via automated telephone conversation, according to best practice guidelines, and a Short Form-12 preoperative assessment. Following this screen, patients are referred for an in-person assessment by an appropriate multidisciplinary team member; namely, a diabetes specialist, physiotherapist, dietitian, smoking cessation counselor, social worker, vocational counselor, and/or psychologist. RESULTS: Since initiation in February 2021, the AFU Program has enrolled more than 1237 patients with 508 multidisciplinary team referrals prompted by the AFU screening platform. Before program initiation, there were no multidisciplinary team referrals for preoperative optimization. Compared with patients treated between February 2020 and February 2021, there was a 2.5% decrease in hospital readmission rate within 30 days of surgery, a 0.6-day shorter hospital stay, and a 2.5% decrease in surgical site infection. CONCLUSIONS: Our cardiac surgery AFU Program reduced adverse health outcomes for patients by identifying and optimizing risk factors that increased quality of patient care. The AFU Program provides patient/caregiver engagement through educational support and multidisciplinary team counseling.

Long-term survival, cardiovascular, and functional outcomes after minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting in 566 patients.

OBJECTIVE: Sternotomy has been the gold standard incision for surgical revascularization but may be associated with chronic pain and sternal malunion. Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting allows for complete surgical revascularization through a small thoracotomy in selected patients. There is a paucity of long-term data, particularly functional outcomes, for patients who underwent minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting. METHODS: Patients (N = 566) who underwent minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting at a single institution over a 17-year period were prospectively followed. The primary outcome was survival. At late follow-up, patients were contacted for a questionnaire on functional outcomes. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard model identified correlates of the primary outcome. RESULTS: Clinical follow-up was complete for 100% of patients (mean 7.0 ± 4.4 years); a follow-up questionnaire was also completed for 83.9% (N = 427) of live patients. Fifty percent of patients (N = 283) had undergone multivessel grafting. At 12 years, survival for the entire cohort was 82.2% ± 2.6%. On late follow-up questionnaire, 12 patients (2.8%) had greater than Canadian Cardiovascular Score Class II angina and 19 patients (4.5%) had greater than New York Heart Association Class II symptoms. More than 98% of patients did not have pain related to the incision site. Cox proportional hazards analysis identified older age, peripheral vascular disease, prior myocardial infarction, left ventricular dysfunction, cancer in the past 5 years, intraoperative transfusion, and hybrid revascularization as correlates of mortality during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting is a safe and durable alternative to sternotomy coronary artery bypass grafting in selected patients, with excellent short- and long-term outcomes, including for multivessel coronary disease. At long-term follow-up, the proportion of patients with significant symptoms and incisional pain was low.

Expert systematic review on the choice of conduits for coronary artery bypass grafting: endorsed by the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS).

PREAMBLE: The finalized document was endorsed by the EACTS Council and STS Executive Committee before being simultaneously published in the European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery (EJCTS) and The Annals of Thoracic Surgery (The Annals) and the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (JTCVS).

Graft Failure After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting and Its Association With Patient Characteristics and Clinical Events: A Pooled Individual Patient Data Analysis of Clinical Trials With Imaging Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Graft patency is the postulated mechanism for the benefits of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). However, systematic graft imaging assessment after CABG is rare, and there is a lack of contemporary data on the factors associated with graft failure and on the association between graft failure and clinical events after CABG. METHODS: We pooled individual patient data from randomized clinical trials with systematic CABG graft imaging to assess the incidence of graft failure and its association with clinical risk factors. The primary outcome was the composite of myocardial infarction or repeat revascularization occurring after CABG and before imaging. A 2-stage meta-analytic approach was used to evaluate the association between graft failure and the primary outcome. We also assessed the association between graft failure and myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, or all-cause death occurring after imaging. RESULTS: Seven trials were included comprising 4413 patients (mean age, 64.4±9.1 years; 777 [17.6%] women; 3636 [82.4%] men) and 13 163 grafts (8740 saphenous vein grafts and 4423 arterial grafts). The median time to imaging was 1.02 years (interquartile range [IQR], 1.00-1.03). Graft failure occurred in 1487 (33.7%) patients and in 2190 (16.6%) grafts. Age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.08 [per 10-year increment] [95% CI, 1.01-1.15]; P=0.03), female sex (aOR, 1.27 [95% CI, 1.08-1.50]; P=0.004), and smoking (aOR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.04-1.38]; P=0.01) were independently associated with graft failure, whereas statins were associated with a protective effect (aOR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.63-0.88]; P<0.001). Graft failure was associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction or repeat revascularization occurring between CABG and imaging assessment (8.0% in patients with graft failure versus 1.7% in patients without graft failure; aOR, 3.98 [95% CI, 3.54-4.47]; P<0.001). Graft failure was also associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction or repeat revascularization occurring after imaging (7.8% versus 2.0%; aOR, 2.59 [95% CI, 1.86-3.62]; P<0.001). All-cause death after imaging occurred more frequently in patients with graft failure compared with patients without graft failure (11.0% versus 2.1%; aOR, 2.79 [95% CI, 2.01-3.89]; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In contemporary practice, graft failure remains common among patients undergoing CABG and is strongly associated with adverse cardiac events.

Surgical Management and Mechanical Circulatory Support in High-Risk Pulmonary Embolisms: Historical Context, Current Status, and Future Directions: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Acute pulmonary embolism is the third leading cause of cardiovascular death, with most pulmonary embolism-related mortality associated with acute right ventricular failure. Although there has recently been increased clinical attention to acute pulmonary embolism with the adoption of multidisciplinary pulmonary embolism response teams, mortality of patients with pulmonary embolism who present with hemodynamic compromise remains high when current guideline-directed therapy is followed. Because historical data and practice patterns affect current consensus treatment recommendations, surgical embolectomy has largely been relegated to patients who have contraindications to other treatments or when other treatment modalities fail. Despite a selection bias toward patients with greater illness, a growing body of literature describes the safety and efficacy of the surgical management of acute pulmonary embolism, especially in the hemodynamically compromised population. The purpose of this document is to describe modern techniques, strategies, and outcomes of surgical embolectomy and venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and to suggest strategies to better understand the role of surgery in the management of pulmonary embolisms.

Low-Dose vs Standard Warfarin After Mechanical Mitral Valve Replacement: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend a target international normalized ratio (INR) range of 2.5 to 3.5 in patients with a mechanical mitral prosthesis. The Prospective Randomized On-X Anticoagulation Clinical Trial (PROACT) Mitral randomized controlled noninferiority trial assessed safety and efficacy of warfarin at doses lower than currently recommended in patients with an On-X (Artivion, Inc) mechanical mitral valve. METHODS: After On-X mechanical mitral valve replacement, followed by at least 3 months of standard anticoagulation, 401 patients at 44 North American centers were randomized to low-dose warfarin (target INR, 2.0-2.5) or standard-dose warfarin (target INR, 2.5-3.5). All patients were prescribed aspirin, 81 mg daily, and encouraged to use home INR testing. The primary end point was the sum of the linearized rates of thromboembolism, valve thrombosis, and bleeding events. The design was based on an expected 7.3% event rate and 1.5% noninferiority margin. RESULTS: Mean patient follow-up was 4.1 years. Mean INR was 2.47 and 2.92 (P <.001) in the low-dose and standard-dose warfarin groups, respectively. Primary end point rates were 11.9% per patient-year in the low-dose group and 12.0% per patient-year in the standard-dose group (difference, -0.07%; 95% CI, -3.40% to 3.26%). The CI >1.5%, thus noninferiority was not achieved. Rates (percentage per patient-year) of the individual components of the primary end point were 2.3% vs 2.5% for thromboembolism, 0.5% vs 0.5% for valve thrombosis, and 9.13% vs 9.04% for bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with standard-dose warfarin, low-dose warfarin did not achieve noninferiority for the composite primary end point. (PROACT Clinicaltrials.gov number, NCT00291525).

Lipid Lowering in "Very High Risk" Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery and Its Projected Reduction in Risk for Recurrent Vascular Events: A Monte Carlo Stepwise Simulation Approach.

ABSTRACT: 2018 AHA guidelines provide criteria to identify patients at very high risk (VHR) for adverse vascular events and recommend an low density lipoprotein-C (LDL-C) level <1.8 mmol/L. Data regarding the 10-year risk for adverse vascular events in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) patients at VHR and the need for nonstatin therapies in the VHR cohort are limited. We queried a national cohort of CABG patients to answer these questions. The projected reduction of LDL-C from stepwise escalation of lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) was simulated; Monte Carlo methods were used to account for patient-level heterogeneity in treatment effects. Data on preoperative statin therapy and LDL-C levels were obtained. In the first scenario, all eligible patients not at target LDL-C received high-intensity statins, followed by ezetimibe and then alirocumab; alternatively, bempedoic acid was also used. The 10-year risk for an adverse vascular event was estimated using a validated risk score. Potential risk reduction was estimated after simulating maximal LLT. Before CABG, 8948 of 27,443 patients (median LDL-C 85 mg/dL) were at VHR. In the whole cohort, 31% were receiving high-intensity statins. With stepwise LLT escalation, the proportion of patients at target were 60%, 78%, 86%, and 97% after high-intensity statins, ezetimibe, bempedoic acid, and alirocumab, respectively. The projected 10-year risk to suffer a vascular event reduced by 4.6%. A large proportion of CABG patients who are at VHR for vascular events fail to meet 2018 AHA LDL-C targets. A stepwise approach, particularly with the use of bempedoic acid, can significantly reduce the need for more expensive proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin 9 inhibitors.

Outcomes of Surgical Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients Aged ≤65 and >65 Years.

BACKGROUND: Implantation of a bioprosthetic valve is a reasonable choice for patients aged > 65 years. For middle-aged patients there is less certainty about whether a mechanical or bioprosthetic valve is best. METHODS: The Pericardial Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement (PERIGON) Pivotal Trial is evaluating the safety and efficacy of the Avalus bioprosthesis (Medtronic). We evaluated clinical and echocardiographic outcomes through 5 years of follow-up, stratified by age ≤ 65 and >65 years. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-one patients (24.2%) were ≤65 years old and 847 (75.8%) >65 years old. Most patients in both groups were men (217 [80.1%] vs 623 [73.6%], respectively; P = .031). Younger patients had a lower Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk of mortality (1.1% ± 0.9% vs 2.2% ± 1.4%, P < .001), better baseline New York Heart Association class (P = .004), and fewer comorbidities than older patients. At 5 years mortality was lower among younger than older patients (5.3% vs 14.0%, P < .001) and no cases of structural valve deterioration occurred in either group. Effective orifice area was similar between age groups (P = .11), and mean gradient was 13.9 ± 5.4 vs 12.0 ± 4.1 mm Hg (P < .001). Multivariable linear regression identified several parameters associated with mean aortic gradient at 5 years, including baseline age and mean aortic gradient, discharge stroke volume index and EOA, and implanted valve size. Ninety-five percent of patients were in New York Heart Association class I/II through 5 years in both age groups (P = .85). CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this analysis demonstrate satisfactory safety, hemodynamic performance, and durability of the Avalus bioprosthesis through a 5-year follow-up in patients aged ≤ 65 and >65 years.