|
|
||||||||||
|
J Am Coll Cardiol, 2008; 51:1234-1235, doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2007.12.017 © 2008 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation |
* Cardiologia San Luca, Referral Center for Cardiomyopathies, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Careggi, Viale Pieraccini 17, Florence, Florence 50132, Italy (Email: olivottoi{at}ao-careggi.toscana.it).
For example: 1) Patients with NYHA functional class III to IV symptoms of heart failure improve measurably after myectomy, often achieving functional class I (2–4). Obviously, symptomatic improvement cannot represent a clinical target in NYHA functional class I to II patients. 2) Postoperatively, patients with class III to IV symptoms have a long-term survival benefit equivalent to that of the general population (4). 3) There are few (if any) available data documenting irreversible heart failure despite adequate myectomy, due to an excessive period of NYHA functional class III to IV symptoms. 4) No consistent data support the advantage of myectomy in reducing left atrial size and the propensity for atrial fibrillation (2,5). For example, in the paper by Woo et al. (3), a substantial proportion of operated patients still went on to develop atrial fibrillation during follow-up.
On the other hand, we agree with Dr. Ferrazzi and colleagues that is probably not necessary or advisable to require symptomatic patients with obstructive HCM to prolong decisions regarding operative intervention until they are essentially disabled. Indeed, once symptoms related to obstruction become fixed and unresponsive to conventional pharmacologic treatment, further medical treatment is unlikely to result in clinical improvement equivalent to that expected following myectomy.
Finally, it is tantalizing to consider earlier intervention with surgical myectomy, given the very low operative mortality now reported by major centers (4). Nevertheless, we hesitate to promote myectomy for asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic patients with obstructive HCM, given that open-heart procedures are never without a mortality and morbidity risk, even at particularly experienced centers (2,4,5). Therefore, we welcome the suggestion of expanding the multicenter registry for obstructive HCM that we have proposed, as a tool to identify ideal candidates for septal reduction therapies (1). However, such registry may ultimately prove of limited value in establishing the need for earlier intervention in HCM patients.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Related Article
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | SUBSCRIPTIONS | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | CARDIOSOURCE | SEARCH | HELP | FEEDBACK |