Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 7, 2025

Delayed Intramyocardial Delivery of Stem Cells after Ischemia Reperfusion Injury in a Murine Model
Published on: September 3, 2020
Myocardial Revascularization in Patients With Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: For Whom and How
Riccardo Liga1, Andrea Colli1, David P Taggart2
1Cardiology Division, Pisa University Hospital and Chair of Cardiology University of Pisa Italy.
Insights
Surgical revascularization may improve prognosis in ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM), but percutaneous coronary intervention does not. Myocardial ischemia and viability testing are not supported for guiding treatment in ICM patients.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Interventional Cardiology
- Cardiac Surgery
Background:
- Myocardial revascularization is considered for improving function and prognosis in ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM).
- Evidence for revascularization strategies and the role of ischemia/viability detection in ICM management requires clarification.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the prognostic impact of revascularization in patients with ICM.
- To assess the value of viability imaging in guiding treatment decisions for ICM.
Main Methods:
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on revascularization in ICM.
- Included trials: HEART, STICH, REVIVED-BCIS2, PARR-2, analyzing outcomes based on treatment strategy and viability imaging.
Main Results:
- STICH trial showed improved long-term survival with surgical revascularization versus optimal medical therapy; no benefit for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
- Neither myocardial ischemia nor viability testing predicted treatment outcomes in STICH or REVIVED-BCIS2.
- PARR-2 trial found no significant difference with imaging-guided revascularization versus standard care.
Conclusions:
- Surgical revascularization, particularly bypass surgery, may improve long-term prognosis in ICM patients, while PCI offers no significant benefit.
- Current RCT data do not support the routine use of myocardial ischemia or viability testing for guiding revascularization treatment decisions in ICM.
- An algorithm integrating clinical presentation, imaging, and surgical risk is proposed for ICM patient workup.
Abstract:
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.
More Related Videos
09:12Surgical Swine Model of Chronic Cardiac Ischemia Treated by Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery
Published on: March 27, 2018
14:35Post-Myocardial Infarction Heart Failure in Closed-chest Coronary Occlusion/Reperfusion Model in Göttingen Minipigs and Landrace Pigs
Published on: April 17, 2021
Related Concept Videos
Cardiomyopathy V: Interprofessional Care
Myocarditis III: Medical Management
Cardiomyopathy IV: Restrictive Cardiomyopathy
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care
Cardiomyopathy II: Dilated Cardiomyopathy
Cardiomyopathy III: Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy