Cited 133 times since 2006 (7.5 per year) source: EuropePMC Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Volume 48, Issue 5, 17 3 2006, Pages 964-969 Should major vascular surgery be delayed because of preoperative cardiac testing in intermediate-risk patients receiving beta-blocker therapy with tight heart rate control? Poldermans D, Bax JJ, Schouten O, Neskovic AN, Paelinck B, Rocci G, van Dortmont L, Durazzo AE, van de Ven LL, van Sambeek MR, Kertai MD, Boersma E, Dutch Echocardiographic Cardiac Risk Evaluation Applying Stress Echo Study Group
Objectives
The purpose of this study was to assess the value of preoperative cardiac testing in intermediate-risk patients receiving beta-blocker therapy with tight heart rate (HR) control scheduled for major vascular surgery.
Background
Treatment guidelines of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association recommend cardiac testing in these patients to identify subjects at increased risk. This policy delays surgery, even though test results might be redundant and beta-blockers with tight HR control provide sufficient myocardial protection. Furthermore, the benefit of revascularization in high-risk patients is ill-defined.
Methods
All 1,476 screened patients were stratified into low-risk (0 risk factors), intermediate-risk (1 to 2 risk factors), and high-risk (> or =3 risk factors). All patients received beta-blockers. The 770 intermediate-risk patients were randomly assigned to cardiac stress-testing (n = 386) or no testing. Test results influenced management. In patients with ischemia, physicians aimed to control HR below the ischemic threshold. Those with extensive stress-induced ischemia were considered for revascularization. The primary end point was cardiac death or myocardial infarction at 30-days after surgery.
Results
Testing showed no ischemia in 287 patients (74%); limited ischemia in 65 patients (17%), and extensive ischemia in 34 patients (8.8%). Of 34 patients with extensive ischemia, revascularization before surgery was feasible in 12 patients (35%). Patients assigned to no testing had similar incidence of the primary end point as those assigned to testing (1.8% vs. 2.3%; odds ratio [OR] 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.28 to 2.1; p = 0.62). The strategy of no testing brought surgery almost 3 weeks forward. Regardless of allocated strategy, patients with a HR <65 beats/min had lower risk than the remaining patients (1.3% vs. 5.2%; OR 0.24; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.66; p = 0.003).
Conclusions
Cardiac testing can safely be omitted in intermediate-risk patients, provided that beta-blockers aiming at tight HR control are prescribed.
