Revascularization For Ischemic Cardiomyopathy Research Articles

Outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention or bypass surgery for ischemic cardiomyopathy

Introduction and objectivesThere are 2 options to achieve revascularization in ischemic cardiomyopathy: percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). While the benefits of PCI for ischemic cardiomyopathy are unclear, achieving complete revascularization with PCI could improve outcomes comparable to CABG. MethodsA total of 1496 patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <50% and multivessel disease who underwent either PCI or CABG were selected from a single-center cohort registry. They were divided into the PCI with complete revascularization (n=188), the PCI with incomplete revascularization (n=263), and the CABG group (n=1045), and then compared. The primary outcome was a 5-year composite of cardiac death or myocardial infarction. ResultsA total of 1496 patients treated for ischemic cardiomyopathy was stratified into CABG (n=1045) and PCI (n=451) groups, the latter subdivided into complete (n=188) or incomplete revascularization (n=263). PCI showed a higher incidence of the primary outcome compared with CABG (PCI vs CABG, 27.8% vs 22.2%, adjusted HR, 1.35; 95%CI, 1.05-1.73, P=.019). However, PCI with complete revascularization and CABG had similar incidences of the primary outcome (20.5% vs 22.2%, adjusted HR, 1.07; 95%CI, 0.73-1.57; P=.718). ConclusionsCABG is associated with more favorable clinical outcomes than PCI in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. However, achieving complete revascularization with PCI could improve outcomes comparable to CABG.

Frailty, age, and treatment effect of surgical coronary revascularization in ischemic cardiomyopathy: a post hoc analysis of the STICHES trial.

Frailty is common among older patients with heart failure (HF). The efficacy of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) on the risk of mortality amongfrailpatients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and HF is uncertain, and whether frailty burden modifies the treatment benefits of CABG among these patients is unknown. We performed a post hoc analysis of the STICHES trial, a randomized trial of CABG with medical therapy vs medical therapy alone among participants with ischemic cardiomyopathy with ejection fraction ≤ 35%. Baseline frailty was assessed through a Rockwood Frailty Index (FI), and based on FI cut-offs from prior HF studies, participants with FI ≥ 0.311 were classified as more frail, and those with FI < 0.311 were classified as less frail. A multivariable Cox proportional hazard model with multiplicative interaction terms was constructed to evaluate whether frailty status modified the treatment effect of CABG on mortalityin the overall trial cohort and among those < 60 vs ≥ 60 years of age. Of 1187 participants (12.4% female, 2.6% Black, median FI = 0.33 [IQR 0.27-0.39]), 678 were characterized as more frail. Frailty burden did not modify the efficacy of CABG on the risk of all-cause death in the overall cohort (Pint CABG × frailty = 0.2). In age stratified analysis,Baseline frailty status did not modify the treatment effect of CABG on the risk of all-cause mortality among younger (< 60years, Pint CABG × frailty = 0.2) as well as older participants (≥60years, Pint CABG × frailty = 0.6). In this post hoc analysis of the STICHES trial, baseline frailty status did not modify the efficacy of CABG in the overall cohort as well asamong younger or older participants. Frailty alone should not be used as a criterion to determine the utilization of CABG among patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy.

Revascularization in ischemic cardiomyopathy. Is viability testing still viable?

Revascularization in ischemic cardiomyopathy. Is viability testing still viable?

Choice of revascularization strategy for ischemic cardiomyopathy due to multivessel coronary disease

ObjectiveLimited comparative data guide the decision between coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention for multivessel revascularization in ischemic cardiomyopathy. The study objective was to compare the long-term outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention for ischemic cardiomyopathy. MethodsClinical registries from the New Jersey Department of Health linked to administrative databases were used to compare all-cause mortality, repeat revascularization, heart failure readmissions, myocardial infarction, and stroke using Cox proportional hazards and propensity matching with competing risk analysis in 5988 patients with ejection fraction 35% or less who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (3673, 61.3%) or percutaneous coronary intervention (2315, 38.6%) for multivessel coronary disease between 2007 and 2018. Median follow-up time was 5.2 years (range, 0-13 years); the last follow-up date was December 31, 2020. ResultsAfter controlling for completeness of revascularization, at 13 years, mortality was 57% (95% CI, 51-63) after percutaneous coronary intervention and 60% (95% CI, 53-66) after coronary artery bypass grafting (hazard ratio [HR], 1.10; 95% CI, 0.93-1.31; P = .28); risk of repeat revascularization was 18% for percutaneous coronary intervention versus 14% for coronary artery bypass grafting (HR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.17-2.25; P = .003); risk of readmission for heart failure was 16% after percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting (HR, 1.13,95% CI, 0.84-1.51, weighted P = .10); risk of myocardial infarction was 10% versus 6%, respectively (HR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.18-3.09; P = .007); and stroke risk was 3% versus 4%, respectively (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.41-1.53; P = .52). Rate of complete revascularization was lower after percutaneous coronary intervention than after coronary artery bypass grafting and associated with higher mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention (HR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.20-1.52; P < .001). ConclusionsCoronary bypass was associated with similar mortality, stroke, and heart failure readmissions, and reduced repeat revascularization compared with percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy if similar rates of complete revascularization were achieved. These findings support consensus recommendations for coronary artery bypass grafting and medical therapy in patients with multivessel coronary disease and left ventricular dysfunction.

Early Mechanical Support and Revascularization in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: Premature or Prudent?

Early Mechanical Support and Revascularization in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: Premature or Prudent?

Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Heart Failure

Heart failure (HF) is a clinical syndrome with a wide variety of clinical presentations, pathophysiologies, and natural histories. HF is becoming more prevalent globally, thus increasing effects on healthcare systems. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging is a valuable tool for better understanding HF and its prognosis. The commonly used reference standard of CMR cine imaging provides accurate assessment of chamber size and function. Phase contrast imaging can be used to assess the degree of valvular regurgitation and complex flow patterns. Stress perfusion imaging can detect subtle areas of ischemia and microvascular dysfunction. Late gadolinium enhancement imaging aids in diagnosing causes of HF and guiding revascularization in ischemic cardiomyopathy. Supported by histological validation, T1 and T2 mapping provides non-invasive information on tissue characteristics in inflammatory and infiltrative cardiomyopathies. CMR also provides various techniques to measure strain in the atria and ventricles at high spatial and temporal resolution. CMR continues to serve as an important modality for the evaluation of HF.

Abstract 16341: A Rare Case of Dual Cardiomyopathy: Acute Decompensated Heart Failure Secondary to Eosinophilic Myocarditis and Ischemic Cardiomyopathy

Introduction: Dual cardiomyopathy, characterized by the coexistence of two distinct forms of myocardial dysfunction, is a rare phenomenon with complex diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. We present a unique case of a patient with combined eosinophilic myocarditis and ischemic cardiomyopathy. Case Presentation: A 65-year-old female with history of peripheral eosinophilia presented with worsening dyspnea and abdominal pain. CT abdomen was notable for right renal artery thrombosis. Troponin I was elevated at 0.057 ng/ml and 0.056 ng/ml. Notably, her absolute eosinophil count was elevated to 20.34 K/mcL. EKG with LVH and repolarization abnormalities. TTE showed a severely reduced LVEF of 18% and severe global hypokinesis. Decision Making: Given her newly diagnosed cardiomyopathy, a cardiac MRI was obtained that demonstrated presence of two moderate-sized cylindrical thrombi in the LV and subendocardial late gadolinium enhancement in the basal to mid antero/inferoseptum and inferolateral wall, characteristic of both myocardial infarction and eosinophilic myocarditis (Figure 1). She underwent a coronary angiogram that revealed severe mid LAD and OM1 artery stenosis that required PCI. She was initiated on appropriate medical therapy including steroids with normalization of her peripheral eosinophilia and improvement in her clinical symptoms. Discussion: This case highlights the intricate interplay between eosinophilic myocarditis and underlying ischemic cardiomyopathy. The timely initiation of appropriate therapies, including corticosteroids for eosinophilic myocarditis and revascularization for ischemic cardiomyopathy, can lead to favorable outcomes in these complex cases. Figure 1: Cardiac MRI showing inferolateral LGE and Cylindrical LV thrombi.

The Evolving Paradigm of Revascularization in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: from Recovery of Systolic Function to Protection Against Future Ischemic Events.

We aim to reevaluate how the assessment of myocardial viability can guide optimal treatment strategies for patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) based on a more contemporary understanding of the mechanism of benefit of revascularization. The assessment of viability in left ventricular (LV) segments with diminished contraction has been proposed as key to predict the benefit of revascularization and, therefore, as a requisite for the selection of patients to undergo this form of treatment. However, data from prospective trials have diverged from earlier retrospective studies. Traditional binary viability assessment may oversimplify ICM's complexity and the nuances of revascularization benefits. A conceptual shift from the traditional paradigm centered on the assessment of viability as a dichotomous variable to a more comprehensive approach encompassing a thorough understanding of ICM's complex pathophysiology and the salutary effect of revascularization in the prevention of myocardial infarction and ventricular arrhythmias is required.

Revascularization in Ischemic Heart Failure with Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is estimated to account for over 60% of heart failure (HF) patients and is associated with worse outcomes than a non-ischemic etiology. In patients with ischemic HF, myocardial revascularization has multiple mechanisms of action based on the concept that blood flow restoration of viable but underperfused myocardium might reverse the hibernation of the left ventricle and prevent future spontaneous myocardial infarction, which could potentially improve patients' outcomes. Here, we aim to elaborate on indications, timing, type, and impact of completeness of revascularization in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and ischemic etiology. For decades, coronary artery bypass graft surgery has been the pilar of revascularization in patents with multivessel CAD and reduced EF. Recent development in the interventional field led to overall increase of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) adoption in treatment of ischemic HFrEF. However, recently published randomized study demonstrated no added benefit of PCI over optimal medical therapy in patients with severe ischemic cardiomyopathy challenging the beneficial role of revascularization in this setting. Since the decision on revascularization in ischemic cardiomyopathy frequently cannot be made based strictly on guidelines, tailored treatment strategy should be mandated with the essential role of multidisciplinary approach. These decisions should be based on capability to achieve complete revascularization, with the consideration that in certain situations it may not be accomplished.

Myocardial Revascularization in Patients With Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: For Whom and How.

Background Myocardial revascularization has been advocated to improve myocardial function and prognosis in ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM). We discuss the evidence for revascularization in patients with ICM and the role of ischemia and viability detection in guiding treatment. Methods and Results We searched for randomized controlled trials evaluating the prognostic impact of revascularization in ICM and the value of viability imaging for patient management. Out of 1397 publications, 4 randomized controlled trials were included, enrolling 2480 patients. Three trials (HEART [Heart Failure Revascularisation Trial], STICH [Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure], and REVIVED [REVascularization for Ischemic VEntricular Dysfunction]-BCIS2) randomized patients to revascularization or optimal medical therapy. HEART was stopped prematurely without showing any significant difference between treatment strategies. STICH showed a 16% lower mortality with bypass surgery compared with optimal medical therapy at a median follow-up of 9.8 years. However, neither the presence/extent of left ventricle viability nor ischemia interacted with treatment outcomes. REVIVED-BCIS2 showed no difference in the primary end point between percutaneous revascularization or optimal medical therapy. PARR-2 (Positron Emission Tomography and Recovery Following Revascularization) randomized patients to imaging-guided revascularization versus standard care, with neutral results overall. Information regarding the consistency of patient management with viability testing results was available in ≈65% of patients (n=1623). No difference in survival was revealed according to adherence or no adherence to viability imaging. Conclusions In ICM, the largest randomized controlled trial, STICH, suggests that surgical revascularization improves patients' prognosis at long-term follow-up, whereas evidence supports no benefit of percutaneous coronary intervention. Data from randomized controlled trials do not support myocardial ischemia or viability testing for treatment guidance. We propose an algorithm for the workup of patients with ICM considering clinical presentation, imaging results, and surgical risk.

Organ-saving surgical alternatives to treatment of heart failure.

Over time, various surgical treatment strategies have evolved to manage advanced heart failure (HF). Scientific and technological breakthroughs through the last 50 years have put forward various surgical alternatives to patients with advanced HF encompassing surgical ventricular restoration to surgical gene therapy and stem cell replacement of the diseased ventricles. Organ-saving surgical options which used to be promising included dynamic cardiomyoplasty, partial resection of ventricle and cardiac wrapping with Acorn CorCap cardiac support device. These procedures were eventually abandoned due to negative outcomes and without proven disadvantages. Another organ-saving surgical option currently being considered but still make little sense is cardiac regeneration by stem cell therapy, i.e., cardiomyocyte restoration and replacement. Presently, the organ-saving surgical alternatives to treat end-stage HF are revascularization for ischemic cardiomyopathy, mitral valve surgery (repair or replacement) for ischemic mitral incompetence (IMI), left ventricular (LV) aneurysmectomy (surgical ventricular restoration) and mitral valve repair for IMI. These aforementioned procedures have become quite established approaches and with increasing experience are continuously being modified to improve outcome. Various mechanical circulatory support systems have emerged over time to improve functional status of patients with advanced HF, either as a bridge to heart transplantation or as a bridge to myocardial recovery. Likewise offered in those with contraindications to transplantation. Ventricular assist devices (VAD) can keep patients alive until an eventual transplantation. This article reviews the variety of the myriad of alternative organ-saving surgical alternatives that have been available or are currently available provided to patients with end-stage HF, their advantages and deficiencies, as well as prospects in HF therapy.

Midterm outcome of off-pumpCABG for severe LV dysfunction-Does LV size and function predict their midterm outcome?

The superiority of surgical revascularization in ischemic cardiomyopathy is established beyond doubt, and off-pump CABG (OP-CABG) is a safe way of revascularization in this high-risk subset. Data on the effect of postoperative ventricular function and size on their midterm outcome is scarce. A retrospective study was done on 211 consecutive patients with severe LV dysfunction who underwent OP-CABG from January 2017 to December 2018. Data were collected from the institutional database. Their operative and midterm outcomes were statistically analyzed. The mean age of the cohort was 58.4 ± 8.3 years. An average number of grafts was 3.1 ± 0.8 (cumulative intended number of grafts-3). Operative mortality was 10.9%. Preoperative NYHA class (p < .0001; OR, 19.72) and postoperative IABP insertion (p < .008; OR,88.75) were independent predictors of operative mortality. The mean follow-up period was 3.14 ± 0.07 years, was 97.4% complete with cardiac mortality of 5.8%. Postoperative LVEF (p = .002; OR, 0.868)and LV dimensions (systole & diastole) (p = .013, OR = 1.182 and p = .036, OR = 1.184, respectively) were independent predictors of midterm mortality. Midterm major adverse cardiovascular event-free survival of operative survivors was 89%. There was no correlation between postoperative LV dimension and NYHA status(p > .05). Myocardial viability was not associated with early (p = .17) or midterm mortality (p = .676). OP-CABG can achieve complete revascularization in patients with severe LV dysfunction with good midterm outcomes,albeitwith high early operative mortality. Postoperative change in LV dimension and EF are predictors of midterm mortality.

Long-Term Outcomes of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Veterans with Ischemic Cardiomyopathy.

The Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure (STICH) trial showed that surgical revascularization in ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) patients improves long-term mortality compared with medical treatment alone. This study examines how veterans with ICM undergoing revascularization fare against patients without ICM; it also examines the outcomes in the veteran population. This is a retrospective review of a single-center database. From 2000 to 2018, 1,461 patients underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Two-hundred-one patients with an ejection fraction less than 35% were classified as the ICM cohort. The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications. Subgroup analysis was performed within the ICM cohort comparing off-pump CABG (OPCAB) versus on-pump CABG (ONCAB). ICM patients had a higher incidence of myocardial infarction (MI), diabetes, chronic kidney disease (CKD), and preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) use. The non-ICM cohort was more functionally independent. OPCAB was performed in 80.1% of ICM and 66.3% of non-ICM cohorts. There was no statistical difference between ICM and non-ICM cohorts in 30-day mortality (OR 1.94[0.79 - 4.75], P = .15). The ICM cohort had an increased 5-year mortality (OR 1.75[1.14 - 2.69], P = .01) and 10-year mortality (OR 1.71[1.09 - 2.67], P = .02). The ICM cohort showed improved, although not statistically significant, short-term mortality with OPCAB compared with ONCAB (3.1% versus 12.5%, OR 0.31[0.05 - 1.82], P = .20). Veterans with ICM undergoing CABG demonstrated similar short-term survival compared with non-ICM veterans. The long-term survival in the ICM cohort still is inferior to patients without ICM. There is a trend toward improved short-term survival in patients with ICM undergoing OPCAB.

Increased myocardial wall thickening as index of viability assessment: a preliminary report on delayed contrast MRI

Regional wall thickening measurement by delayed contrast MRI may assess myocardial viability and functional recovery of ischemic cardiomyopathy. Delayed contrast MRI data was used in 40 patients with significant coronary artery disease and severe left ventricular dysfunction. Regional wall thickening on follow-up MRI served as an index of functional recovery in patients receiving revascularization. For comparison, myocardial viability was assessed by MRI and 201Tl SPECT in 10 patients using a 17-segment method. On 480 segments, MRI hyperintensities showed positive correlation with 201Tl reduction (r = 0.71, p < 0.0001) in the inferior wall and apex. Delayed MRI detected myocardial viability better than 201Tl SPECT. Delayed contrast-enhanced MRI showed diagnostic accuracy 65%, sensitivity 95%, specificity 25%, positive predictive value 65% and negative predictive value 75%, whereas 201Tl SPECT showed diagnostic accuracy 54%, sensitivity 72%, specificity 25%, positive predictive value 52% and negative predictive value 54%. Areas under the ROC curves by MRI and 201Tl SPECT were 0.59 +/- 0.04, 0.52 +/- 0.05, respectively (p = 0.07). The viability concordance was 80% between 201Tl SPECT and MRI. Delayed contrast-enhanced MRI may detect the inferior wall thickening and apex as an index of viable myocardium better than 201Tl SPECT. Myocardial viability may predict functional recovery after revascularization in ischemic cardiomyopathy.

Interaction between two predictors of functional outcome after revascularization in ischemic cardiomyopathy: Left ventricular volume and amount of viable myocardium

In patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and substantial amounts of dysfunctional but viable myocardium, revascularization cannot always improve the left ventricular ejection fraction. We sought to investigate the interaction between the left ventricular volume and the amount of viable myocardium to predict the left ventricular ejection fraction increase after revascularization. Eighty-five consecutive patients with a depressed left ventricular ejection fraction (mean: 27.3% +/- 5.2%) underwent coronary artery bypass grafting after a dobutamine stress echocardiography had determined that they had at least 4 viable segments. Six months after coronary artery bypass grafting, left ventricular ejection fraction and regional wall motion were reassessed. Although the left ventricular ejection fraction was expected to recover more than 5% in all 85 patients after coronary artery bypass grafting, it did not improve in 15 patients (17.6%) despite the presence of viable segments. The likelihood of the left ventricular ejection fraction recovery decreased proportionally with an increase in the left ventricular end-systolic volume. The nonimprovers had a higher left ventricular end-systolic volume (164.2 +/- 22.4 mL vs 125.6 +/- 23.4 mL, P = .0001). In addition, the number of viable segments during the dobutamine stress echocardiography had a significant correlation with the ejection fraction increase after 6 months (P < .0001). Patients with 6 viable segments showed a good outcome irrespective of their left ventricular end-systolic volume. In patients with fewer than 6 viable segments, left ventricular end-systolic volume was a major factor in the prognosis: Patients with left ventricular end-systolic volume of 145 or more had a poor left ventricular ejection fraction increase and vice versa. The extent of left ventricular remodeling determines the rate of functional improvement after coronary artery bypass grafting. Patients with a high left ventricular end-systolic volume and fewer than 6 viable segments have a lower likelihood of improvement.

746 Reversibility of restrictive filling during low-dose dobutamine echocardiography predicts reverse LV remodeling after revascularization in ischemic cardiomyopathy

746 Reversibility of restrictive filling during low-dose dobutamine echocardiography predicts reverse LV remodeling after revascularization in ischemic cardiomyopathy

Survival after myocardial revascularization for ischemic cardiomyopathy—A prospective ten-year follow-up study

Survival after myocardial revascularization for ischemic cardiomyopathy—A prospective ten-year follow-up study

Role of dobutamine echocardiography in detection of myocardial viability for predicting outcome after revascularization in ischemic cardiomyopathy

Coronary artery disease is the most common cause of heart failure in the Western world. Compared with medical therapy, surgical revascularization has been shown to improve survival rates in nonrandomized trials in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. However, perioperative mortality is high in this group of patients who do not demonstrate significant viable myocardium. Echocardiography during dobutamine infusion has been shown to reliably detect viable myocardium. Several studies have demonstrated its ability to provide high predictive value for recovery of both regional and global left ventricular function after revascularization. Indeed, nonrandomized studies also have indicated its value in predicting which patients with severe ischemic cardiomyopathy are likely to survive after revascularization. Dobutamine stress echocardiography has emerged as a safe and valuable technique for the assessment of myocardial viability and for the selection of patients for revascularization. (J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2001;14:240-8.)

Predicting long-term functional results after myocardial revascularization in ischemic cardiomyopathy

Objective: The goal of the present study was to define the early and late functional results after revascularization in ischemic cardiomyopathy and to identify variables predictive of a favorable outcome. Methods: A retrospective review of all consecutive patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy undergoing myocardial revascularization between January 1991 and June 1998 was undertaken. One hundred sixty-seven patients (140 men) aged 60 ± 8 years (range, 39-77 years) with angina (n = 107), congestive heart failure (n = 54), or silent ischemia (n = 6) were identified. One hundred six (63%) patients with angina were in Canadian Cardiovascular Society class III or IV, and 40 (24%) patients with congestive failure were in New York Heart Association class III or IV. The preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction averaged 0.28 ± 0.05 (range, 0.16-0.30). Thirteen (8%) patients required preoperative mechanical life support. A mean of 2.9 ± 0.9 grafts per patient were performed, with an average myocardial ischemia time of 53 ± 23 minutes and bypass time of 104 ± 31 minutes. Results: There were 3 (1.7%) early deaths and 21 (13%) deaths during follow-up (2.7 ± 2.1 years; range, 0.3-7.8 years), producing a survival of 94% ± 2% and 75% ± 10% at 1 and 5 years, respectively. Despite a significant increase in left ventricular ejection fraction (0.28 ± 0.05 vs 0.38 ± 0.09, P =.0001), only 89 (54%) patients were symptom-free at follow-up. Freedom from recurrent angina was 98% ± 1% and 81% ± 8%, whereas freedom from congestive failure was 78% ± 11% and 47% ± 20% at 1 and 5 years, respectively. Follow-up New York Heart Association class in patients with congestive failure was improved (40/54 class III-IV vs 11/54 class III-IV, P =.0001). Multivariate analysis showed a lower ejection fraction (P =.01), preoperative congestive failure (P =.03), and a need for preoperative intra-aortic balloon pumping (P =.03) to be associated with a greater prevalence of recurrent congestive failure, whereas male sex (P =.01), preoperative angina (P =.04), use of the internal thoracic artery (P =.03), and higher number of grafts (P =.01) were associated with lower prevalence. Male sex (P =.06), higher number of grafts (P =.04), and shorter duration of myocardial ischemia (P =.04) were also predictive of improvement in New York Heart Association class at follow-up. Conclusions: Despite satisfactory early and late survival, late functional outcome after myocardial revascularization in ischemic cardiomyopathy remains suboptimal because of recurrence or persistence of congestive failure. Selection of appropriate surgical candidates and extensive use of complete revascularization with the internal thoracic artery may substantially improve functional results. (J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2000;120:478-89)