Does a Gradient-Adjusted Cardiac Power Index Improve Prediction of Post-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Survival Over Cardiac Power Index?

Purpose@#Cardiac power (CP) index is a product of mean arterial pressure (MAP) and cardiac output (CO). In aortic stenosis, however, MAP is not reflective of true left ventricular (LV) afterload. We evaluated the utility of a gradient-adjusted CP (GCP) index in predicting survival after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), compared to CP alone. @*Materials and Methods@#We included 975 patients who underwent TAVR with 1 year of follow-up. CP was calculated as (CO× MAP)/[451×body surface area (BSA)] (W/m2). GCP was calculated using augmented MAP by adding aortic valve mean gradient (AVMG) to systolic blood pressure (CP1), adding aortic valve maximal instantaneous gradient to systolic blood pressure (CP2), and adding AVMG to MAP (CP3). A multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed adjusting for baseline covariates. Receiver operator curves (ROC) for CP and GCP were calculated to predict survival after TAVR. @*Results@#The mortality rate at 1 year was 16%. The mean age and AVMG of the survivors were 81±9 years and 43±4 mm Hg versus 80±9 years and 42±13 mm Hg in the deceased group. The proportions of female patients were similar in both groups (p=0.7). Both CP and GCP were independently associated with survival at 1 year. The area under ROCs for CP, CP1, CP2, and CP3 were 0.67 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.62–0.72], 0.65 (95% CI, 0.60–0.70), 0.66 (95% CI, 0.61–0.71), and 0.63 (95% CI 0.58–0.68), respectively. @*Conclusion@#GCP did not improve the accuracy of predicting survival post TAVR at 1 year, compared to CP alone.

Revascularization for Left Main and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: Current Status and Future Prospects after the EXCEL and NOBLE Trials

Revascularization of severe left main and multivessel coronary artery disease has been shown to improve survival in both stable ischemic heart disease and acute coronary syndrome. While revascularization with coronary artery bypass surgery for these disease entities carries class I recommendation in most current guidelines, recent trials has shown potential comparable survival and cardiovascular outcomes between percutaneous and surgical interventions in patients with less complex coronary anatomy. Despite the conflicting results observed in the most recent left main revascularization trials, Everolimus-Eluting Stents or Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease (EXCEL) and Nordic-Baltic-British left main revascularization (NOBLE), both treatment strategies remain important for the management of left main disease (LMD) and multivessel disease (MVD) reflecting on the importance of heart team discussion. This review is focused on revascularization of LMD and MVD in patients who are not presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, encompassing the evidence from historic and contemporary trials which shaped up current practices. This review discusses the heart team approach to guide decision making, including special populations that are not represented in clinical trials.

Revascularization for Left Main and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: Current Status and Future Prospects after the EXCEL and NOBLE Trials

Revascularization of severe left main and multivessel coronary artery disease has been shown to improve survival in both stable ischemic heart disease and acute coronary syndrome. While revascularization with coronary artery bypass surgery for these disease entities carries class I recommendation in most current guidelines, recent trials has shown potential comparable survival and cardiovascular outcomes between percutaneous and surgical interventions in patients with less complex coronary anatomy. Despite the conflicting results observed in the most recent left main revascularization trials, Everolimus-Eluting Stents or Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease (EXCEL) and Nordic-Baltic-British left main revascularization (NOBLE), both treatment strategies remain important for the management of left main disease (LMD) and multivessel disease (MVD) reflecting on the importance of heart team discussion. This review is focused on revascularization of LMD and MVD in patients who are not presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, encompassing the evidence from historic and contemporary trials which shaped up current practices. This review discusses the heart team approach to guide decision making, including special populations that are not represented in clinical trials.

Three Dimensional Quantitative Coronary Angiography Can Detect Reliably Ischemic Coronary Lesions Based on Fractional Flow Reserve

Conventional coronary angiography (CAG) has limitations in evaluating lesions producing ischemia. Three dimensional quantitative coronary angiography (3D-QCA) shows reconstructed images of CAG using computer based algorithm, the Cardio-op B system (Paieon Medical, Rosh Ha'ayin, Israel). The aim of this study was to evaluate whether 3D-QCA can reliably predict ischemia assessed by myocardial fractional flow reserve (FFR) < 0.80. 3D-QCA images were reconstructed from CAG which also were evaluated with FFR to assess ischemia. Minimal luminal diameter (MLD), percent diameter stenosis (%DS), minimal luminal area (MLA), and percent area stenosis (%AS) were obtained. The results of 3D-QCA and FFR were compared. A total of 266 patients was enrolled for the present study. FFR for all lesions ranged from 0.57 to 1.00 (0.85 +/- 0.09). Measurement of MLD, %DS, MLA, and %AS all were significantly correlated with FFR (r = 0.569, 0609, 0.569, 0.670, respectively, all P < 0.001). In lesions with MLA < 4.0 mm2, %AS of more than 65.5% had a 80% sensitivity and a 83% specificity to predict FFR < 0.80 (area under curve, AUC was 0.878). 3D-QCA can reliably predict coronary lesions producing ischemia and may be used to guide therapeutic approach for coronary artery disease.