Why the study?
Guidelines recommend a multidisciplinary heart team approach for managing complex CAD, but its impact on clinical outcomes and adherence to recommendations is rarely reported.
Does multidisciplinary heart team-guided management improve adherence and clinical outcomes in high-risk patients with complex coronary artery disease?
Does multidisciplinary heart team-guided management improve adherence and clinical outcomes in high-risk patients with complex coronary artery disease?
A multidisciplinary heart team approach for complex CAD achieves high adherence to treatment recommendations and highlights favorable survival outcomes with CABG compared to PCI or OMT in this high-risk cohort.
Supports heart team use in complex CAD; leaves open whether CABG survival advantage is causal.
Objective: Guidelines recommend a multidisciplinary heart team approach for managing complex coronary artery disease (CAD), yet its impact on clinical outcomes and adherence to recommendations is rarely reported. Methods: Between June 2021 and August 2022, 210 high-risk patients with isolated, complex CAD were evaluated at our institution's weekly heart team conference for consideration of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), hybrid PCI/CABG, or optimal medical therapy (OMT). Adherence to recommendations and clinical outcomes, including 30-day, 1-year, and 2-year mortality, were assessed. Results: Overall adherence to heart team recommendations was 92%, with 96% adherence for CABG, 90% for PCI, 87% for OMT, and 75% for hybrid PCI/CABG. CABG was the most frequently recommended treatment (53%) and demonstrated the lowest mortality at 1 year (4%) and 2 years (6%) compared with PCI (1 year, 28%; 2 year, 40%) and OMT (1 year, 10%; 2 year, 20%). CABG patients had a lower-than-expected mortality (observed-to-expected ratio 0.9), while PCI was associated with significantly higher mortality (observed-to-expected ratio 3.0). Conclusion: This single-center multidisciplinary heart team approach for complex CAD offers a collaborative, patient-centered model that facilitates high adherence rates and favorable patient outcomes. These findings highlight the potential benefits of integrating multidisciplinary evaluation and support its implementation into standard practice for high-risk CAD patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pickering et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: