Key result
Mild left ventricular diastolic dysfunction did not significantly increase the risk of 30-day mortality (1.6% vs 0%, p=NS) or other perioperative morbidities compared to normal diastolic function in patients undergoing isolated coronary bypass surgery.
Why the study?
Does mild left ventricular diastolic dysfunction increase perioperative morbidity and mortality in patients with preserved LV systolic function undergoing isolated coronary bypass surgery?
Cohort (n=472)
No
Does mild left ventricular diastolic dysfunction increase perioperative morbidity and mortality in patients with preserved LV systolic function undergoing isolated coronary bypass surgery?
Absolute Event Rate: 1.6% vs 0%
p-value: p=NS
Mild left ventricular diastolic dysfunction does not increase the risk of adverse perioperative outcomes in patients with preserved ejection fraction undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting.
Mild diastolic dysfunction may not raise perioperative CABG risk in preserved EF; leaves open confirmation in larger prospective studies.
BACKGROUND: Although moderate to severe diastolic dysfunction (DD) seems to be associated with poor prognosis after isolated coronary bypass surgery, the impact of mild DD has not been investigated extensively in this group of patients. AIM: We evaluated the prognostic implication of mild left ventricular (LV) DD on outcome after isolated coronary bypass surgery in patients with preserved LV systolic function. METHODS: Data from 650 patients undergoing isolated coronary bypass surgery and having records for LV diastolic function between January 2009 and August 2011 was collected retrospectively. DD was classified as mild (grade 1, impaired relaxation), moderate (grade 2, decreased compliance) or severe (grade 3-4, restrictive pattern) depending on mitral inflow wave, tissue Doppler imaging, and pulmonary vein flow wave. Patients with baseline rhythm other than sinus, moderate or severe valvular dysfunction, moderate or severe diastolic dysfunction, and LV ejection fraction lower than 50% were excluded. A total of 472 patients were identified within the database fulfilling the eligibility criteria for this analysis and stratified according to the echocardiographic findings as follows: group 1 comprised patients with normal diastolic function (n = 168); and group 2 was made up of patients with mild DD (impaired relaxation) (n = 304). These groups were compared for perioperative morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: The preoperative variables were comparable between groups. The outcome parameters of group 1 was similar compared to group 2 in terms of need for inotropic support (20.2% vs. 16.2%), intra-aortic balloon pump usage (0% vs. 1.4%), mechanical ventilation time (8.94 ± 0.96 h vs. 10.0 ± 0.89 h), reintubation rate (1.8% vs. 1.4%), intensive care unit stay time (24.1 ± 1.4 hvs. 26.2 ± 1.9 h), postoperative renal failure rate (0% vs. 0.3%), postoperative atrial fibrillation rate (10.1% vs. 11.2%), length of hospital stay (7.19 ± 0.45 vs. 6.57 ± 0.14 days), hospital readmission rate (3.1% vs. 3.1%), and mortality (0% vs. 1.6%). CONCLUSIONS: The results from this study indicate that mild LV DD is not associated with adverse outcome after coronary bypass surgery in patients with preserved LV systolic function, thus should not be considered as a preoperative risk factor.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Değirmencioğlu et al. (2014) conducted a cohort in Coronary artery disease requiring isolated coronary bypass surgery (n=472). Mild left ventricular diastolic dysfunction vs. Normal diastolic function was evaluated on Mortality (index hospitalization or first 30 days) (p=NS). Mild left ventricular diastolic dysfunction did not significantly increase the risk of 30-day mortality (1.6% vs 0%, p=NS) or other perioperative morbidities compared to normal diastolic function in patients undergoing isolated coronary bypass surgery.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: