|
|
||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ann Thorac Surg 2000;70:1290
© 2000 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons
Discussion
DR CHARLES B. HUDDLESTON (St. Louis, MO): I wonder if you could comment on the general direction of skeletal cardiomyoplasty research. The postgraduate course discussants gave a somewhat pessimistic view of the future of, I guess, a more standard skeletal cardiomyoplasty procedure, and I wonder if it looks like it is headed more in this direction or what your opinion is?
DR THOMAS: Well, I think in regards to the future, the phase 3 clinical trial with cardiomyoplasty has not borne out that it is procedure that is going to gain a lot of popularity. In fact, as far as my knowledge, I do not think it has really generated any evidence of a survival benefit, which is one of the things the trial was designed to do; and therefore, the interest in cardiomyoplasty as a procedure has really waned.
Skeletal muscle represents one of many different ways to provide treatment for the problem of congestive heart failure. Because of the limitation of donor supply, cardiac transplantation, which remains the gold standard, is limited by the number that can be done on a yearly basis. Skeletal muscle holds promise, but it is also in competition with mechanical devices. As time has gone on, mechanical devices have addressed some of the initial problems that occurred with infection and thrombosis. However, I think
Related Article
Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2000 70: 1281-1289.
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ANN THORAC SURG | ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN | EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG |
| J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG | ICVTS | ALL CTSNet JOURNALS |