Faculty Bibliography

Cardiac involvement in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been established. This is manifested by troponin elevation and associated with worse patient prognosis. We evaluated whether patient outcomes improved as experience accumulated during the pandemic. We analyzed COVID-19-positive patients with myocardial injury (defined as troponin elevation) who presented to the MedStar Health system (11 hospitals in Washington, DC, and Maryland) during the "Early Phase" of the pandemic (March 1 - June 30, 2020) and compared their characteristics and outcomes to the COVID-19-positive patients with the presence of troponin elevation in the "Later Phase" of the pandemic (October 1, 2020 - January 31, 2021). The cohort included 788 COVID-19-positive admitted patients for whom troponin was elevated, 167 during the "Early Phase" and 621 during the "Later Phase." Maximum troponin-I in the "Early Phase" was 13.46±34.72 ng/mL versus 11.21±20.57 ng/mL in the "Later Phase" (p = 0.553). In-hospital mortality was significantly higher in the "Later Phase" (50.3% vs. 24.6%; p<0.001), as were incidence of intensive-care-unit admission (77.8% vs. 46.1%; p<0.001) and need for mechanical ventilation (61.7% versus 28%; p<0.001). In addition, more "Early Phase" patients underwent coronary angiography (6% vs. 2.3%; p=0.013). Finally, 3% of "Early Phase" and 0.8% of "Later Phase" patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (p=0.025). In conclusion, treatment outcomes have significantly improved since the beginning of the pandemic in COVID-19-positive patients with troponin elevation. This may be attributed to awareness, severity of the disease, improvements in therapies, and provider experience.

Acute coronary artery occlusion is a rare but devastating complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Coronary obstruction is angiographic evidence of a new-partial or complete-obstruction of a coronary artery. Key factors identifying patients at risk are aortic root anatomy, type of aortic valve, and type of transcatheter heart valve. Techniques to prevent coronary obstruction include intentional leaflet laceration. If acute coronary obstruction does occur, bailout stenting can be challenging and conversion to emergent open heart surgery may be required, both of which are associated with high morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE:Compare two large-bore vascular closure devices (VCDs), collagen-plug-based MANTA and suture-based dual Perclose ProGlide (PP), in patients undergoing contemporary transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). BACKGROUND:The SAFE MANTA IDE clinical trial demonstrated that the collagen-plug-based MANTA VCDs were safe and effective in closing large-bore arteriotomies. However, data comparing this collagen-plug-based VCD to the suture-based VCD in contemporary practice are sparse. METHODS:This was a retrospective observational study in which we screened transfemoral (TF) TAVR patients at our institution from 2017 to 2020. Included were those whose large-bore TF access was closed using either MANTA or PP with and without Angio-Seal. Our primary outcome was VCD success. Additional in-hospital outcomes included major and minor vascular complications, post-TAVR length of stay, and mortality. RESULTS:We screened 696 patients who underwent TAVR. Using propensity scores, we matched 124 patients who received MANTA with 124 patients who received PP. Patients had a mean age of 77.2 years, 69.0% were men, and their mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 3.4%. VCD success was equivalent between VCDs (95.2% vs. 95.2%; p = 1.000). Patients had similar rates of mortality (0% vs. 0.8%; p = .316), and no patients had major vascular complications. CONCLUSIONS:In contemporary TAVR, the collagen-plug-based MANTA VCD appears to be as safe and effective as the suture-based dual PP VCD, with no differences in VCD success, vascular complications, or mortality. Therefore, selection of VCD for TAVR should be left to operator discretion, taking into account anatomical considerations.

The efficacy of early administration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for secondary prevention after acute ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) is uncertain. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares the safety and efficacy of early administration (<24 hours) of DAPT (using either clopidogrel or ticagrelor with aspirin) versus single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT; aspirin alone) in acute non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke or TIA, incorporating data from large randomized controlled trials. Published trials fulfilling our criteria were identified from an electronic search of MEDLINE, with key words including: "clopidogrel or ticagrelor", "aspirin", "ischemic stroke", "transient ischemic attack", and "randomized controlled trial". Included were 3 randomized controlled trials of 21,067 patients assessing early administration (<24 hours from symptom onset) of DAPT versus SAPT in non-cardioembolic acute ischemic stroke or TIA. Our efficacy outcomes were ischemic stroke and all-cause mortality. Our safety outcome was severe bleeding. We performed a meta-analysis to pool results with a hierarchical Bayesian random-effects model. Dual antiplatelet therapy significantly reduced the risk of ischemic stroke (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.54, 0.97), while increasing the risk of severe bleeding (HR, 2.48; 95% CrI: 1.07, 5.26). There was a non-significant numerical trend toward increased mortality with DAPT (HR, 1.29; 95% CrI: 0.73, 2.23). These observations were robust under the sensitivity analysis. In the present systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, DAPT reduced the risk of ischemic stroke at the cost of an increase in severe bleeding. Additional trials examining the ideal timing of DAPT administration are needed to thoroughly investigate the role, if any, of routine DAPT in patients with non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke or high-risk TIA.

End-stage liver disease (ESLD) is increasingly prevalent and shares many risk factors with coronary artery disease (CAD). No specific guidelines exist for pre-liver transplant evaluation of CAD, and pretransplant cardiovascular testing varies widely. The aim of this study is to characterize pre-transplant cardiac testing practices with post-transplant clinical outcomes. We retrospectively reviewed patients undergoing initial liver transplantation at our transplant center between January 2015 and March 2019. Patients with previous liver transplantation or multi-organ transplantation were excluded. Electronic medical records were reviewed for relevant demographic and clinical data. We included 285 patients with a mean follow-up of 2.4 years. Of 274 patients (96.1%) with pre-transplant transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE), 18 (6.6%) were abnormal. Non-invasive ischemic testing was performed in 193 (68%) patients: 165 (58%) underwent stress TTE, 24 (8%) underwent myocardial perfusion imaging, 3 underwent coronary computed tomography, and 1 underwent exercise electrocardiogram. Sixteen patients (6%) had left heart catheterization of which 10 (63%) were abnormal and 5 proceeded to revascularization before transplant. There were 4 (1.4%) deaths within 30 days of transplant and 23 deaths (8.1%) in total. ST-elevation myocardial infarction was seen in 1 patient within 30 days and 1 patient after 30 days (0.7% total). No cardiovascular deaths were observed. Among patients undergoing liver transplantation, pre-transplantation cardiovascular testing is exceedingly common and post-transplant cardiovascular complications are rare. Additional research is needed to determine the optimal testing and surveillance in this patient population.

BACKGROUND:Myocardial injury is a complication of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We describe a large multi-center experience of COVID-19 patients with myocardial injury, examining the prognostic role left ventricular function plays on short-term outcomes. METHODS/MATERIALS:We included adult COVID-19 patients admitted to our health system with evidence of myocardial injury and who underwent a transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) during index admission. Patients were dichotomized into those with reduced ejection fraction (EF; <50%) and preserved EF (≥50%). RESULTS:Across our 11-hospital system, 5032 adult patients were admitted with COVID-19 from March-September 2020. Of these, 235 had evidence of myocardial injury (troponin ≥1 ng/mL). Included were 134 patients who underwent TTE, of whom 43.3% (n = 58) had reduced EF and 56.7% (n = 76) preserved EF. A subset of 6 patients had newly reduced EF, with 5 demonstrating evidence of stress cardiomyopathy and subsequently dying. Overall, mortality was high in those with reduced EF and preserved EF (in-hospital: 34.5% vs. 28.9%; p = 0.494; 6 months: 63.6% vs. 50.0%; p = 0.167; Kaplan-Meier estimates: p = 0.2886). Readmissions were frequent in both groups (30 days: 22.2% vs. 26.0%; p = 0.162; 6 months: 52.0% vs. 54.5%; p = 0.839). CONCLUSIONS:Many COVID-19 patients admitted with evidence of myocardial injury did not undergo TTE. For those who did, short-term mortality was high. Patients who survived hospitalization had frequent readmissions. In patients with newly reduced EF, most had evidence of stress cardiomyopathy and expired. Larger studies are needed to fully evaluate the prognosis of COVID-19 patients with evidence of myocardial injury and left ventricular dysfunction.

BACKGROUND:Before its voluntary recall, the mechanically expandable LOTUS Edge transcatheter heart valve (THV) offered a number of unique features, notably sealing against paravalvular leak (PVL) and the ability to be fully deployed, re-captured, and re-deployed. METHODS:We performed a detailed review of all patients at our institution who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using the LOTUS Edge THV from 2019 to 2020. We describe procedural and in-hospital outcomes. RESULTS:In brief, 59 patients underwent TAVR using the LOTUS Edge, of whom 18 were high-risk (most of whom had moderate or severe left ventricular outflow tract [LVOT] calcium), 36 were intermediate-risk enrolled in the REPRISE IV trial (one of whom had a bicuspid valve), and 5 were low-risk bicuspid patients enrolled in the LRT trial. Conduction disturbances were common (new left bundle branch block in 64.4%), with high rates of new permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation across all risk groups (16.9%). Overall, stroke occurred in 11.9% of patients, and in 3/5 low-risk bicuspid patients, but occurred less frequently in patients with cerebral embolic protection. CONCLUSIONS:In our experience, in patients with heavy LVOT calcium burden and/or bicuspid valves, the LOTUS Edge THV offered excellent seal against PVL. However, the high rates of periprocedural stroke and new PPM implantation were a concern.

BACKGROUND:To date, there are no real-world studies comparing cangrelor to glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Thus, we performed this study to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of cangrelor compared to GPI during PCI. METHODS:We identified patients who underwent PCI at our institution who received either cangrelor or GPI during PCI. Patients already on GPI or cangrelor prior to PCI or who received both cangrelor and GPI were excluded. Baseline demographics and clinical outcomes were extracted. Major bleeding is defined as a composite of major hematoma >4 cm, hematocrit drop >15, and gastrointestinal bleeding. RESULTS:A total of 2072 patients received adjunctive antiplatelet therapy during PCI (cangrelor [n=478]; GPI [n=1594]). Patients' mean age was 61±12 years. Most (66%) presented with acute coronary syndrome. Patients who received cangrelor were older and had a higher percentage of acute coronary syndrome and lower baseline hematocrit in comparison with patients who received GPI. Procedural success was achieved in 94% of patients, with no difference between groups. Major bleeding events (1.7% vs. 5.1%, P=.001), any vascular complication rates, and hospital length of stay were significantly lower in the cangrelor group. In-hospital ischemic events did not differ between groups. On regression analysis, patients on cangrelor were noted to have significantly lower major bleeding events (OR 0.23; 95% CI, 0.09-0.59). CONCLUSIONS:Balancing ischemic and bleeding risks with adjunctive antiplatelet drugs is of prime importance during PCI. Our real-world analysis shows that cangrelor is safe and effective when compared to GPI during PCI.

Background: Following a period of stability, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic appears to be re-intensifying globally. As the pandemic continues to evolve, so does our understanding of its implications on ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). We sought to describe a single center STEMI experience at one of the epicenters of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Method(s): This was a retrospective observational study which included consecutive suspected STEMI patients from March 1 through August 31, 2019, (Cohort 1) compared to the same time period in 2020 (Cohort 2), at a tertiary referral center in Nassau County, New York.
Result(s): Cohort 2 (n=93) saw a similar number of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) team activations compared to cohort 1 (n=90) (Figure 1). Infection control measures and additional investigation were required to clarify the diagnosis in cohort 2, resulting in longer door-to-balloon times (95.9 minutes vs. 74.4 minutes, p=0.0587). We observed similar inpatient length of stay (LOS) (3.6 days vs. 5.0 days, p=0.0901) and mortality (13.2% vs. 9.2%, p=0.5876).
Conclusion(s): Our single-center study, located at one of the epicenters of the pandemic, demonstrated a similar number of AMI team activations, mimicking the seasonal variability seen in 2019, but with longer door-to-balloon times. Despite this, inpatient LOS and mortality remained unchanged. [Formula presented]
Copyright