UpToDate
Official reprint from UpToDate®
www.uptodate.com ©2016 UpToDate®

Ischemic cardiomyopathy: Treatment and prognosis

Authors
James C Fang, MD
Sary Aranki, MD
Section Editors
Bernard J Gersh, MB, ChB, DPhil, FRCP, MACC
Wilson S Colucci, MD
Deputy Editor
Brian C Downey, MD, FACC

INTRODUCTION

The term ischemic cardiomyopathy has been used to describe significantly impaired left ventricular function (left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] ≤35 to 40 percent) that results from coronary artery disease. Despite the common clinical use of the term ischemic cardiomyopathy, there is no consensus of the term ischemic cardiomyopathy [1-3]. Additionally, ventricular dysfunction caused by coronary disease is not a cardiomyopathy as defined by the 2006 American Heart Association and 2008 European Society of Cardiology statements [1,2]. (See "Definition and classification of the cardiomyopathies".)

There are two main pathogenetic mechanisms, which are importantly distinguished by the possibility of corrective therapy:

Irreversible loss of myocardium due to prior myocardial infarction with ventricular remodeling. Recovery of myocardial function in such patients cannot be achieved by coronary revascularization since the infarcted tissue is not viable.

At least partially reversible loss of contractility due to reduced function of ischemic but still viable myocardium, which can be detected on imaging studies. Hibernating myocardium is typically used interchangeably with viable myocardium. However, by strict definition, the term hibernating myocardium refers to contractile dysfunction in viable myocardium that improves after revascularization or perhaps medical therapy [4,5]. Stunned myocardium refers to transient postischemic dysfunction and can coexist with hibernating myocardium [6]. Repetitive bouts of stunned myocardium can also result in hibernating myocardium. (See "Clinical syndromes of stunned or hibernating myocardium".)

This topic will discuss the available therapies for ischemic cardiomyopathy as well as prognosis. The clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and evaluation of patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy are discussed in detail separately. (See "Evaluation of hibernating myocardium" and "Dobutamine stress echocardiography in the evaluation of hibernating myocardium" and "Assessment of myocardial viability by nuclear imaging in coronary heart disease".)

             

Subscribers log in here

To continue reading this article, you must log in with your personal, hospital, or group practice subscription. For more information or to purchase a personal subscription, click below on the option that best describes you:
Literature review current through: Nov 2016. | This topic last updated: Wed Oct 26 00:00:00 GMT 2016.
The content on the UpToDate website is not intended nor recommended as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your own physician or other qualified health care professional regarding any medical questions or conditions. The use of this website is governed by the UpToDate Terms of Use ©2016 UpToDate, Inc.
References
Top
  1. Maron BJ, Towbin JA, Thiene G, et al. Contemporary definitions and classification of the cardiomyopathies: an American Heart Association Scientific Statement from the Council on Clinical Cardiology, Heart Failure and Transplantation Committee; Quality of Care and Outcomes Research and Functional Genomics and Translational Biology Interdisciplinary Working Groups; and Council on Epidemiology and Prevention. Circulation 2006; 113:1807.
  2. Elliott P, Andersson B, Arbustini E, et al. Classification of the cardiomyopathies: a position statement from the European Society Of Cardiology Working Group on Myocardial and Pericardial Diseases. Eur Heart J 2008; 29:270.
  3. Felker GM, Shaw LK, O'Connor CM. A standardized definition of ischemic cardiomyopathy for use in clinical research. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002; 39:210.
  4. Underwood SR, Bax JJ, vom Dahl J, et al. Imaging techniques for the assessment of myocardial hibernation. Report of a Study Group of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2004; 25:815.
  5. Shah BN, Khattar RS, Senior R. The hibernating myocardium: current concepts, diagnostic dilemmas, and clinical challenges in the post-STICH era. Eur Heart J 2013; 34:1323.
  6. Chareonthaitawee P, Gersh BJ, Araoz PA, Gibbons RJ. Revascularization in severe left ventricular dysfunction: the role of viability testing. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 46:567.
  7. Velazquez EJ, Bonow RO. Revascularization in severe left ventricular dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2015; 65:615.
  8. Yancy CW, Jessup M, Bozkurt B, et al. 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of heart failure: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013; 62:e147.
  9. Authors/Task Force members, Windecker S, Kolh P, et al. 2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). Eur Heart J 2014; 35:2541.
  10. Cleland JG, Pennell DJ, Ray SG, et al. Myocardial viability as a determinant of the ejection fraction response to carvedilol in patients with heart failure (CHRISTMAS trial): randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2003; 362:14.
  11. Velazquez EJ, Lee KL, Deja MA, et al. Coronary-artery bypass surgery in patients with left ventricular dysfunction. N Engl J Med 2011; 364:1607.
  12. Mark DB, Knight JD, Velazquez EJ, et al. Quality-of-life outcomes with coronary artery bypass graft surgery in ischemic left ventricular dysfunction: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2014; 161:392.
  13. Velazquez EJ, Lee KL, Jones RH, et al. Coronary-Artery Bypass Surgery in Patients with Ischemic Cardiomyopathy. N Engl J Med 2016; 374:1511.
  14. Hillis LD, Smith PK, Anderson JL, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA Guideline for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2011; 124:2610.
  15. McMurray JJ, Adamopoulos S, Anker SD, et al. ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2012: The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute and Chronic Heart Failure 2012 of the European Society of Cardiology. Developed in collaboration with the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J 2012; 33:1787.
  16. Allman KC, Shaw LJ, Hachamovitch R, Udelson JE. Myocardial viability testing and impact of revascularization on prognosis in patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002; 39:1151.
  17. Bonow RO. The hibernating myocardium: implications for management of congestive heart failure. Am J Cardiol 1995; 75:17A.
  18. Ragosta M, Beller GA, Watson DD, et al. Quantitative planar rest-redistribution 201Tl imaging in detection of myocardial viability and prediction of improvement in left ventricular function after coronary bypass surgery in patients with severely depressed left ventricular function. Circulation 1993; 87:1630.
  19. Auerbach MA, Schöder H, Hoh C, et al. Prevalence of myocardial viability as detected by positron emission tomography in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Circulation 1999; 99:2921.
  20. Brundage BH, Massie BM, Botvinick EH. Improved regional ventricular function after successful surgical revascularization. J Am Coll Cardiol 1984; 3:902.
  21. Tillisch J, Brunken R, Marshall R, et al. Reversibility of cardiac wall-motion abnormalities predicted by positron tomography. N Engl J Med 1986; 314:884.
  22. Lee KS, Marwick TH, Cook SA, et al. Prognosis of patients with left ventricular dysfunction, with and without viable myocardium after myocardial infarction. Relative efficacy of medical therapy and revascularization. Circulation 1994; 90:2687.
  23. Elefteriades JA, Tolis G Jr, Levi E, et al. Coronary artery bypass grafting in severe left ventricular dysfunction: excellent survival with improved ejection fraction and functional state. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993; 22:1411.
  24. Pagley PR, Beller GA, Watson DD, et al. Improved outcome after coronary bypass surgery in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and residual myocardial viability. Circulation 1997; 96:793.
  25. Baer FM, Theissen P, Schneider CA, et al. Dobutamine magnetic resonance imaging predicts contractile recovery of chronically dysfunctional myocardium after successful revascularization. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998; 31:1040.
  26. Wellnhofer E, Olariu A, Klein C, et al. Magnetic resonance low-dose dobutamine test is superior to SCAR quantification for the prediction of functional recovery. Circulation 2004; 109:2172.
  27. Bax JJ, Poldermans D, Elhendy A, et al. Improvement of left ventricular ejection fraction, heart failure symptoms and prognosis after revascularization in patients with chronic coronary artery disease and viable myocardium detected by dobutamine stress echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999; 34:163.
  28. Eitzman D, al-Aouar Z, Kanter HL, et al. Clinical outcome of patients with advanced coronary artery disease after viability studies with positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 20:559.
  29. Samady H, Elefteriades JA, Abbott BG, et al. Failure to improve left ventricular function after coronary revascularization for ischemic cardiomyopathy is not associated with worse outcome. Circulation 1999; 100:1298.
  30. Gerber BL, Rousseau MF, Ahn SA, et al. Prognostic value of myocardial viability by delayed-enhanced magnetic resonance in patients with coronary artery disease and low ejection fraction: impact of revascularization therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012; 59:825.
  31. Desideri A, Cortigiani L, Christen AI, et al. The extent of perfusion-F18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography mismatch determines mortality in medically treated patients with chronic ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 46:1264.
  32. Bax JJ, van der Wall EE, Harbinson M. Radionuclide techniques for the assessment of myocardial viability and hibernation. Heart 2004; 90 Suppl 5:v26.
  33. Shah DJ, Kim HW, James O, et al. Prevalence of regional myocardial thinning and relationship with myocardial scarring in patients with coronary artery disease. JAMA 2013; 309:909.
  34. Carluccio E, Biagioli P, Alunni G, et al. Patients with hibernating myocardium show altered left ventricular volumes and shape, which revert after revascularization: evidence that dyssynergy might directly induce cardiac remodeling. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006; 47:969.
  35. Jones RH, Velazquez EJ, Michler RE, et al. Coronary bypass surgery with or without surgical ventricular reconstruction. N Engl J Med 2009; 360:1705.
  36. Bonow RO, Maurer G, Lee KL, et al. Myocardial viability and survival in ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. N Engl J Med 2011; 364:1617.
  37. Schinkel AF, Poldermans D, Rizzello V, et al. Why do patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and a substantial amount of viable myocardium not always recover in function after revascularization? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2004; 127:385.
  38. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01920048?term=%22ischemic+cardiomyopathy%22+AND+%22PCI%22&rank=2 (Accessed on August 29, 2016).
  39. Bangalore S, Guo Y, Samadashvili Z, et al. Revascularization in Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease and Severe Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction: Everolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery. Circulation 2016; 133:2132.
  40. Sedlis SP, Ramanathan KB, Morrison DA, et al. Outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary bypass grafting for patients with low left ventricular ejection fractions, unstable angina pectoris, and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass (the AWESOME Randomized Trial and Registry). Am J Cardiol 2004; 94:118.