Cargando…

Multidisciplinary Heart Team Approach for Complex Coronary Artery Disease: Single Center Clinical Presentation

BACKGROUND: The Heart Team approach is ascribed a Class I recommendation in contemporary guidelines for revascularization of complex coronary artery disease. However, limited data are available regarding the decision‐making and outcomes of patients based on this strategy. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Young, Michael N., Kolte, Dhaval, Cadigan, Mary E., Laikhter, Elizabeth, Sinclair, Kevin, Pomerantsev, Eugene, Fifer, Michael A., Sundt, Thoralf M., Yeh, Robert W., Jaffer, Farouc A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7428540/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32308096
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.119.014738
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The Heart Team approach is ascribed a Class I recommendation in contemporary guidelines for revascularization of complex coronary artery disease. However, limited data are available regarding the decision‐making and outcomes of patients based on this strategy. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred sixty‐six high‐risk coronary artery disease patients underwent Heart Team evaluation at a single institution between January 2015 and November 2018. We prospectively collected data on demographics, symptoms, Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality/Synergy Between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (STS‐PROM/SYNTAX) scores, mode of revascularization, and outcomes. Mean age was 70.0 years; 122 (73.5%) patients were male. Prevalent comorbidities included diabetes mellitus (51.8%), peripheral artery disease (38.6%), atrial fibrillation (27.1%), end‐stage renal disease on dialysis (13.3%), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (21.7%). Eighty‐seven (52.4%) patients had New York Heart Association III‐IV and 112 (67.5%) had Canadian Cardiovascular Society III‐IV symptomatology. Sixty‐seven (40.4%) patients had left main and 118 (71.1%) had 3‐vessel coronary artery disease. The median STS‐PROM was 3.6% (interquartile range 1.9, 8.0) and SYNTAX score was 26 (interquartile range 20, 34). The median number of physicians per Heart Team meeting was 6 (interquartile range 5, 8). Seventy‐nine (47.6%) and 49 (29.5%) patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting, respectively. With increasing STS‐PROM (low, intermediate, high operative risk), coronary artery bypass graft was performed less often (47.9%, 18.5%, 15.2%) and optimal medical therapy was recommended more often (11.3%, 18.5%, 30.3%). There were no trends in recommendation for coronary artery bypass graft, percutaneous coronary intervention, or optimal medical therapy by SYNTAX score tertiles. In‐hospital and 30‐day mortality was 3.9% and 4.8%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Integrating a multidisciplinary Heart Team into institutional practice is feasible and provides a formalized approach to evaluating complex coronary artery disease patients. The comprehensive assessment of surgical, anatomical, and other risk scores using a decision aid may guide appropriate, evidence‐based management within this team‐based construct.