CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Stenting Left Main

Abstract

Recommended Article

Five-Year Outcomes after PCI or CABG for Left Main Coronary Disease Comparative effectiveness analysis of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with chronic kidney disease and unprotected left main coronary artery disease Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Using Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Left Main Disease: Pre- and Post-EXCEL (Evaluation of XIENCE Everolimus Eluting Stent Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) and NOBLE (Nordic-Baltic-British Left Main Revascularization Study) Era Contemporary Use and Trends in Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States: An Analysis of the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Research to Practice Initiative Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease: 10-year follow-up of the multicentre randomised controlled SYNTAX trial Long-term outcomes after stenting versus coronary artery bypass grafting for unprotected left main coronary artery disease: 10-year results of bare-metal stents and 5-year results of drug-eluting stents from the ASAN-MAIN (ASAN Medical Center-Left MAIN Revascularization) Registry Revascularization in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease and Left Ventricular Dysfunction

Expert OpinionVolume 6, Issue 9, September 2018

JOURNAL:JACC: Heart Failure Article Link

Heart Failure With Improved Ejection Fraction-Is it Possible to Escape One’s Past?

G Gulat, JE Udelson. Keywords: HFrEF; left ventricular ejection fraction; management; outcomes

ABSTRACT


Among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, investigators have repeatedly identified a subgroup whose left ventricular ejection fraction and structural remodeling can improve to normal or nearly normal levels with or without medical therapy. This subgroup of patients with “heart failure with improved ejection fraction” has distinct clinical characteristics and a more favorable prognosis compared with patients who continue to have reduced ejection fraction. However, many of these patients also manifest clinical and biochemical signs of incomplete resolution of heart failure pathophysiology and remain at some risk of adverse outcomes, thus indicating that they may not have completely recovered. Although rigorous evidence on managing these patients is sparse, there are several reasons to recommend continuation of heart failure therapies, including device therapies, to prevent clinical deterioration. Notable exceptions to this recommendation may include patients who recover from peripartum cardiomyopathy, fulminant myocarditis, or stress cardiomyopathy, whose excellent long-term prognoses may imply true myocardial recovery. More research on these patients is needed to better understand the mechanisms that lead to improvement in ejection fraction and to guide their clinical management.