Initial invasive versus conservative management of stable ischemic heart disease patients with a history of heart failure or left ventricular dysfunction: Insights from the ISCHEMIA trial

Background: It is unknown whether an initial invasive strategy in patients with stable ischemic heart disease and at least moderate ischemia improves outcomes in patients with a history of heart failure (HF) or left ventricular dysfunction (LVD) when EF >35%, but <45%. Methods: Among 5179 participants randomized into the International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA), all of whom had LVEF >35%, we compared cardiovascular outcomes by treatment strategy in those with a history of HF or LV dysfunction (HF/LVD) at baseline versus those without HF/LVD. Median follow up was 3.2 years. Results: There were 398 (7.7%) participants with HF/LVD at baseline of whom 177 had HF/LVEF>45%, 28 had HF/LVEF 35-45% and 193 had LVEF 35-45% but no prior history of HF. HF/LVD was associated with more comorbidities at baseline, particularly prior myocardial infarction (MI), stroke and hypertension. Compared to those without HF/LVD, those with HF/LVD were more likely to experience a primary outcome composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal MI, or hospitalization for unstable angina, HF, or resuscitated cardiac arrest; four-year cumulative incidence rate (22.7% vs. 13.8%), cardiovascular death or MI (19.7% vs. 12.3%), and all-cause death or HF (15.0% vs. 6.9%). Those with HF/LVD randomized to the invasive versus conservative strategy had a lower rate of the primary outcome (17.2% vs. 29.3%, difference in 4- year event rate -12.1%; 95% CI: -22.6, -1.6%), whereas those without HF/LVD did not (13.0% vs. 14.6%, difference in 4-year event rate -1.6%; 95% CI: -3.8%, 0.7%; p-interaction = 0.055). A similar differential effect was seen for the primary outcome, all-cause mortality, and CV mortality when invasive versus conservative strategy associated outcomes were analyzed with LVEF as a continuous variable for those with and without prior HF. Conclusions: ISCHEMIA trial participants with stable ischemic heart disease and at least moderate ischemia with a history of HF or LVD were at increased risk for the primary outcome. In the small, high-risk subgroup with HF and LVEF 35-45%, an initial invasive approach was associated with a better event-free survival. This result should be considered hypothesis generating.

Outcomes of chronic total occlusions in coronary arteries according to three therapeutic strategies: a meta-analysis with 6985 patients from 8 published observational studies

Abstract Objective: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and medical treatment (MT) in patients with chronic total occlusions (CTOs). Methods: We identified eligible observational studies published in the China National Knowledge Infrastructure database, PubMed, Excerpta Medica database, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and "Clinical trials" registration from 1999 to October 2018. Main outcome measures were all-cause mortality, cardiac death, major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), and myocardial infarction (MI). Results: There were eight observational studies including 6985 patients. Patients' mean age was 64.4 years. Mean follow-up time was 4.3 years. Comparing with MT (2958 patients), PCI (3157 patients) presented decreased all-cause mortality (odd ratio [OR]: 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.36-0.60; P<0.001), cardiac death (OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.31-0.52; P<0.001), MACE (OR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.43-0.71; P<0.001), and MI (OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.26-0.62; P<0.001). Comparing with MT, CABG (613 patients) presented lower all-cause mortality (OR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.36-0.69; P<0.001) and MACE (OR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.26-0.96; P=0.04), but not lower MI (OR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.03-1.54; P=0.13) and cardiac death (OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.51-1.35). Comparing with CABG, PCI did not present decreased risk for those outcomes. Conclusions: PCI or CABG was associated with better clinical outcome in patients with CTO than MT. PCI is not better than CABG in decreasing mortality, MI, cardiac death, and MACE in coronary CTO patients.

Outcomes of Chronic Total Occlusions in Coronary Arteries According to Three Therapeutic Strategies: A Meta-analysis with 6985 Patients from 8 Published Observational Studies.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and medical treatment (MT) in patients with chronic total occlusions (CTOs). METHODS: We identified eligible observational studies published in the China National Knowledge Infrastructure database, PubMed, Excerpta Medica database, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and "Clinical trials" registration from 1999 to October 2018. Main outcome measures were all-cause mortality, cardiac death, major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), and myocardial infarction (MI). RESULTS: There were eight observational studies including 6985 patients. Patients' mean age was 64.4 years. Mean follow-up time was 4.3 years. Comparing with MT (2958 patients), PCI (3157 patients) presented decreased all-cause mortality (odd ratio [OR]: 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.36-0.60; P<0.001), cardiac death (OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.31-0.52; P<0.001), MACE (OR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.43-0.71; P<0.001), and MI (OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.26-0.62; P<0.001). Comparing with MT, CABG (613 patients) presented lower all-cause mortality (OR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.36-0.69; P<0.001) and MACE (OR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.26-0.96; P=0.04), but not lower MI (OR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.03-1.54; P=0.13) and cardiac death (OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.51-1.35). Comparing with CABG, PCI did not present decreased risk for those outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: PCI or CABG was associated with better clinical outcome in patients with CTO than MT. PCI is not better than CABG in decreasing mortality, MI, cardiac death, and MACE in coronary CTO patients.