Why the study?
The impact of coronary revascularization methods on clinical outcomes in patients with systolic heart failure has not been determined.
Does coronary revascularization (stenting or CABG plus stenting) improve prognosis in patients with systolic heart failure and CAD?
Cohort (n=637)
No
Does coronary revascularization (stenting or CABG plus stenting) improve prognosis in patients with systolic heart failure and CAD?
p-value: p=<.001 and .013
In patients with systolic heart failure and CAD, coronary revascularization with stenting or CABG plus stenting is associated with improved prognosis compared to no revascularization.
The impact of coronary revascularization methods (coronary artery bypass graft [CABG] surgery and stent implantation) on clinical outcome has not been determined yet in patients with systolic heart failure (SHF). We examined outcomes in patients discharged from our hospital after hospitalization for decompensated SHF. Of 637 patients with SHF (mean age, 64 ± 13 years; mean ejection fraction, 26.5% ± 9%), 402 patients (63%) had coronary artery disease (CAD) and 235 patients (37%) had no CAD; 223 patients (35%) died because of cardiovascular reasons during follow-up. Patients who had stenting alone and patients who had CABG surgery and stenting had better prognosis than patients with CAD but no revascularization procedure (P < .001 and P = .013, respectively). In the patients with SHF having CAD who had stenting and CABG surgery + stenting may have better prognosis compared with patients with CAD who had no revascularization procedure in their past.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kozdağ et al. (2012) conducted a cohort in Systolic heart failure (n=637). Stenting alone or CABG surgery and stenting vs. Coronary artery disease with no revascularization procedure was evaluated on Prognosis (cardiovascular death) (p=<.001 and .013).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: