medigraphic.com
ISSN 2007-8013 (Print)
Órgano oficial de la Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa

2023, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Rev Med UAS 2023; 13 (3)

Current overview of myocardial viability in ischemic ventricular dysfunction. A clinical cardiologist’s perspective

Inzunza-Cervantes G, Herrera-Gavilanes JR, Padilla-Islas LA, Velarde-Pérez D, Zazueta AV, Félix CJA

Language: Spanish
References: 43
Page: 326-342
PDF size: 916.90 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Ischemic ventricular dysfunction secondary to coronary artery disease is a frequent and controversial clinical challenge, during the last decades its different diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic strategies have been based on the concept of dysfunctional but potentially viable myocardium. The present review provides a general and integrated description of the current knowledge of this cardiovascular pathology. The evaluation of myocardial viability in ischemic ventricular dysfunction presents a level of controversial and inconsistent evidence leading to a lack of consensus, current evidence from different clinical trials does not show benefit from their routine use as a guide to determine the need for coronary revascularization, questioning its role as a decisive factor in selecting the best therapy or justifying the suitability of an invasive procedure. Being the best scenario to balance the clinical context, the presence of ischemia, imaging studies and the risks of revascularization.


REFERENCES

  1. Löffler AI, Kramer CM. Myocardial ViabilityTesting to Guide Coronary Revascularization.Interv Cardiol Clin. 2018;7(3):355–65.

  2. Kassab K, Kattoor AJ, Doukky R. Ischemiaand Viability Testing in New-Onset Heart Failure.Curr Cardiol Rep. 2020;22(8).

  3. Yap J, Lim FY, Gao F, Wang SZ, Low SCS, LeTT, et al. Effect of Myocardial Viability Assessedby Cardiac Magnetic Resonance onSurvival in Patients With Severe Left VentricularDysfunction. Circ Reports. 2020;2(6):306–13.

  4. Grover S, Srinivasan G, Selvanayagam JB.Myocardial Viability Imaging: Does It Still Havea Role in Patient Selection Prior to CoronaryRevascularisation? Hear Lung Circ.2012;21(8):468–79.

  5. Elamm C, Fang JC. The World Post-STICH: IsThis A “Game Changer?” A Non-Invasive Cardiologist’sPerspective-Revascularization Isthe Treatment of Choice Only in Patients WhoFail Medical Therapy. Prog Cardiovasc Dis.2013;55(5):466–9.

  6. Kazakauskaite E, Vajauskas D, BardauskieneL, Ordiene R, Zabiela V, Zaliaduonyte D, et al.The incremental value of myocardial viability,evaluated by 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positronemission tomography, and cardiovascularmagnetic resonance for mortality prediction inpatients with previous myocardial infarctionand symptomatic heart failure. Perfusion2022;0(0):1–10.

  7. Panza JA, Ellis AM, Al-Khalidi HR, Holly TA,Berman DS, Oh JK, et al. Myocardial Viabilityand Long-Term Outcomes in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy.N Engl J Med. 2019;381(8):739–48.

  8. Ker WDS, Nunes THP, Nacif MS, MesquitaCT. Practical implications of myocardial viabilitystudies. Arq Bras Cardiol.2018;110(3):278–88.

  9. Almeida AG, Carpenter J, Cameli M, Donal E,Dweck MR, Flachskampf FA, et al. OUP acceptedmanuscript. Eur Hear J - CardiovascImaging. 2021;1–29.

  10. Fontana L, Ascarrunz D, Pereira CF, Gabe E.En búsqueda de la viabilidad miocárdica: quémétodo elegir en pacientes con deterioro ventricularsevero. RACI 2020;11(3):112-118.

  11. Doenst T, Nguyen TD, Abel ED. Cardiac metabolismin heart failure: Implications beyondatp production. Circ Res. 2013;113(6):709–24.

  12. Tuomainen T, Tavi P. The role of cardiac energymetabolism in cardiac hypertrophy andfailure. Exp Cell Res. 2017;360(1):12–8.

  13. Panza JA, Chrzanowski L, Bonow RO. MyocardialViability Assessment Before SurgicalRevascularization in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy:JACC Review Topic of the Week. J AmColl Cardiol. 2021;78(10):1068–77.

  14. Shabana A, El-Menyar A. Myocardial viability:What we knew and what is new. Cardiol ResPract. 2012;1(1):1-11

  15. Bock A, Estep JD. Myocardial viability: Heartfailure perspective. Curr Opin Cardiol.2019;34(5):459–65.

  16. Katikireddy CK, Samim A. Myocardial viabilityassessment and utility in contemporary managementof ischemic cardiomyopathy. ClinCardiol. 2022;45(2):152–61.

  17. Schinkel AFL, Poldermans D, Rizzello V, VanoverscheldeJLJ, Elhendy A, Boersma E, et al.Why do patients with ischemic cardiomyopathyand a substantial amount of viable myocardiumnot always recover in function after revascularization?J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg.2004;127(2):385–90.

  18. Li DL, Kronenberg MW. Myocardial Perfusionand Viability Imaging in Coronary Artery Disease:Clinical Value in Diagnosis, Prognosis,and Therapeutic Guidance. Am J Med [Internet].2021;134(8):968–75.

  19. Kireyev D, Adib K, Poh KK, Khalil M, WilsonMF. Viability Studies—Comparison of Techniques.Am Heart Hosp J 2011;9(2):107.

  20. Partington SL, Kwong RY, Dorbala S. Multimodalityimaging in the assessment of myocardialviability. Heart Fail Rev. 2011;16(4):381–95.

  21. Anandaraj AM, Varghese L, Krupa J, ChackoBR, Irodi A, Vimala LR, et al. Can the 12-LeadElectrocardiogram Predict Myocardial Viability?J Clin Diagnostic Res. 2021;15(8):4–7.

  22. Singh G, Bhatti S, Ananthasubramaniam K.Does presence of R wave forces on surfaceelectrocardiogram predict myocardial viabilityin patients with coronary disease and left ventriculardysfunction? Correlation with cardiacMRI. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson.2013;15(S1):1–2.

  23. Madsen S, Dias AH, Lauritsen KM, BoucheloucheK, Tolbod LP, Gormsen LC. MyocardialViability Testing by Positron Emission Tomography:Basic Concepts, Mini-Review of the Literatureand Experience From a Tertiary PETCenter. Semin Nucl Med. 2020;50(3):248–59.

  24. Inaba Y, Chen JA, Bergmann SR. Quantity ofviable myocardium required to improve survivalwith revascularization in patients with ischemiccardiomyopathy: A meta-analysis. JNucl Cardiol. 2010;17(4):646–54.

  25. Méndez A, Merlano S, Murgueitio R, MendozaF, Rodríguez E. Evaluation of myocardial viabilityby Nuclear Medicine. Rev Colomb Cardiol.2019;26:31–8.

  26. Al Moudi M, Sun ZH. Diagnostic value of 18FFDGPET in the assessment of myocardial viabilityin coronary artery disease: A comparativestudy with 99mTc SPECT and echocardiography.J Geriatr Cardiol. 2014;11(3):229–36.

  27. de Oliveira Brito JB, deKemp RA, Ruddy TD.Evolving use of PET viability imaging. J NuclCardiol 2022; 29:1000–1002

  28. Moreno PR, del Portillo JH. Isquemia miocárdica:conceptos básicos, diagnóstico e implicacionesclínicas. Tercera parte. Rev ColombCardiol 2017;24(1):34–9.

  29. De Caterina R, Liga R, Boden WE. Myocardialrevascularization in ischaemic cardiomyopathy:routine practice vs. scientific evidence.Eur Heart J 2022;43(5):387–90.

  30. DeVore AD, Velazquez EJ. Rethinking Revascularizationin Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction.Circ Hear Fail 2017;10(1):175–8.

  31. Mielniczuk LM, Toth GG, Xie JX, De Bruyne B,Shaw LJ, Beanlands RS. Can Functional Testingfor Ischemia and Viability Guide Revascularization?JACC Cardiovasc Imaging2017;10(3):354–64.

  32. Anavekar NS, Chareonthaitawee P, Narula J,Gersh BJ. Revascularization in Patients WithSevere Left Ventricular Dysfunction: Is the Assessmentof Viability Still Viable? J Am CollCardiol. 2016;67(24):2874–87.

  33. Rayol SC, Oliveira Sá MPB, Cavalcanti LRP,Saragiotto FAS, Silva Diniz RG, de Araújo eSá FBC, et al. Current practice of state-of-theartcoronary revascularization in patients withheart failure. Brazilian J Cardiovasc Surg.2019;34(1):93–7.

  34. Cleland JGF, Calvert M, Freemantle N, ArrowY, Ball SG, Bonser RS, et al. The heart failurerevascularisation trial (HEART). Eur J HeartFail. 2011;13(2):227–33.

  35. Beanlands RSB, Nichol G, Huszti E, Humen D,Racine N, Freeman M, et al. F-18-FluorodeoxyglucosePositron Emission Tomography Imaging-Assisted Management of Patients WithSevere Left Ventricular Dysfunction and SuspectedCoronary Disease. A Randomized,Controlled Trial (PARR-2). J Am Coll Cardiol.2007;50(20):2002–12.

  36. Beller GA. Clinical Value of F-18-FluorodeoxyglucosePositron Emission Tomographic Imagingof Myocardial Viability Is Dependent onAdherence to Treatment Strategy Based onImaging Results. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging.2016;9(9):1–3.

  37. Abraham A, Nichol G, Williams KA, Guo A,DeKemp RA, Garrard L, et al. 18F-FDG PETimaging of myocardial viability in an experiencedcenter with access to 18F-FDG and integrationwith clinical management teams: TheOttawa-FIVE substudy of the PARR 2 trial. JNucl Med. 2010;51(4):567–74.

  38. Bonow RO, Maurer G, Lee KL, Holly TA, BinkleyPF, Desvigne-Nickens P, et al. MyocardialViability and Survival in Ischemic Left VentricularDysfunction. N Engl J Med.2011;364(17):1617–25.

  39. Velazquez EJ, Lee KL, Jones RH, Al-KhalidiHR, Hill JA, Panza JA, et al. Coronary-ArteryBypass Surgery in Patients with Ischemic Cardiomyopathy.N Engl J Med.2016;374(16):1511–20.

  40. Erthal F, Wiefels C, Promislow S, Kandolin R,Stadnick E, Mielniczuk L, et al. Myocardial Viability:From PARR-2 to IMAGE HF - CurrentEvidence and Future Directions. Int J CardiovascSci. 2018;32(1):70–83.

  41. O’Meara E, Mielniczuk LM, Wells GA, deKempRA, Klein R, Coyle D, et al. Alternative ImagingModalities in Ischemic Heart Failure (AIMI-HF)IMAGE HF Project I-A: Study protocol for arandomized controlled trial. Trials.2013;14(1):1–12.

  42. Perera D, Clayton T, Petrie MC, GreenwoodJP, O’Kane PD, Evans R, et al. PercutaneousRevascularization for Ischemic VentricularDysfunction: Rationale and Design of the REVIVED-BCIS2 Trial: Percutaneous CoronaryIntervention for Ischemic Cardiomyopathy.JACC Hear Fail. 2018;6(6):517–26.

  43. Perera D, Clayton T, O’Kane PD, GreenwoodJP, Weerackody R, Ryan M, et al. PercutaneousRevascularization for Ischemic Left VentricularDysfunction. N Engl J Med 2022;21–2.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com