Open AccessMultidisciplinary Heart Team Approach for Complex Coronary Artery Disease: Single Center Clinical Presentation
Author(s) -
Young Michael N.,
Kolte Dhaval,
Cadigan Mary E.,
Laikhter Elizabeth,
Sinclair Kevin,
Pomerantsev Eugene,
Fifer Michael A.,
Sundt Thoralf M.,
Yeh Robert W.,
Jaffer Farouc A.
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
journal of the american heart association
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.494
H-Index - 85
ISSN - 2047-9980
DOI - 10.1161/jaha.119.014738
Subject(s) - medicine , interquartile range , cardiology , coronary artery disease , percutaneous coronary intervention , atrial fibrillation , surgery , myocardial infarction
Background The Heart Team approach is ascribed a Class I recommendation in contemporary guidelines for revascularization of complex coronary artery disease. However, limited data are available regarding the decision‐making and outcomes of patients based on this strategy. Methods and Results One hundred sixty‐six high‐risk coronary artery disease patients underwent Heart Team evaluation at a single institution between January 2015 and November 2018. We prospectively collected data on demographics, symptoms, Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality/Synergy Between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery ( STS ‐ PROM / SYNTAX ) scores, mode of revascularization, and outcomes. Mean age was 70.0 years; 122 (73.5%) patients were male. Prevalent comorbidities included diabetes mellitus (51.8%), peripheral artery disease (38.6%), atrial fibrillation (27.1%), end‐stage renal disease on dialysis (13.3%), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (21.7%). Eighty‐seven (52.4%) patients had New York Heart Association III ‐ IV and 112 (67.5%) had Canadian Cardiovascular Society III ‐ IV symptomatology. Sixty‐seven (40.4%) patients had left main and 118 (71.1%) had 3‐vessel coronary artery disease. The median STS ‐ PROM was 3.6% (interquartile range 1.9, 8.0) and SYNTAX score was 26 (interquartile range 20, 34). The median number of physicians per Heart Team meeting was 6 (interquartile range 5, 8). Seventy‐nine (47.6%) and 49 (29.5%) patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting, respectively. With increasing STS ‐ PROM (low, intermediate, high operative risk), coronary artery bypass graft was performed less often (47.9%, 18.5%, 15.2%) and optimal medical therapy was recommended more often (11.3%, 18.5%, 30.3%). There were no trends in recommendation for coronary artery bypass graft, percutaneous coronary intervention, or optimal medical therapy by SYNTAX score tertiles. In‐hospital and 30‐day mortality was 3.9% and 4.8%, respectively. Conclusions Integrating a multidisciplinary Heart Team into institutional practice is feasible and provides a formalized approach to evaluating complex coronary artery disease patients. The comprehensive assessment of surgical, anatomical, and other risk scores using a decision aid may guide appropriate, evidence‐based management within this team‐based construct.