Faculty Bibliography

Background Prevention strategies targeting standard modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (SMuRFs; diabetes, hypertension, smoking, hypercholesterolemia) are critical to improving cardiovascular disease outcomes. However, acute myocardial infarction (AMI) among individuals who lack 1 or more SMuRFs is not uncommon. Moreover, the clinical characteristics and prognosis of SMuRFless individuals are not well characterized. Methods and Results We analyzed AMI hospitalizations from 2000 to 2014 captured by the ARIC (Atherosclerosis Risk in Community) study community surveillance. AMI was classified by physician review using a validated algorithm. Clinical data, medications, and procedures were abstracted from the medical record. Main study outcomes included short- and long-term mortality within 28 days and 1 year of AMI hospitalization. Between 2000 and 2014, a total of 742 (3.6%) of 20 569 patients with AMI were identified with no documented SMuRFs. Patients without SMuRFs were less likely to receive aspirin, nonaspirin antiplatelet therapy, or beta blockers and less often underwent angiography and revascularization. Compared with those with one or more SMuRFs, patients without SMuRFs had significantly higher 28-day (odds ratio, 3.23 [95% CI, 1.78-5.88]) and 1-year (hazard ratio, 2.09 [95% CI, 1.29-3.37]) adjusted mortality. When examined across 5-year intervals from 2000 to 2014, the incidence of 28-day mortality significantly increased for patients without SMuRFs (7% to 15% to 27%), whereas it declined for those with 1 or more SMuRFs (7% to 5% to 5%). Conclusions Individuals without SMuRFs presenting with AMI have an increased risk of all-cause mortality with an overall lower prescription rate for guideline-directed medical therapy. These findings highlight the need for evidence-based pharmacotherapy during hospitalization and the need to discover new markers and mechanisms for early risk identification in this population.

BACKGROUND:In patients with tricuspid valve infective endocarditis, percutaneous debulking is a treatment option. However, the outcomes of this approach are less well known. METHODS:We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent percutaneous vegetation debulking for tricuspid valve infective endocarditis from August 2020 to November 2022 at a large academic tertiary care public hospital. The primary efficacy outcome was procedural success defined by clearance of blood cultures. The primary safety outcome was any procedural complication. For the composite outcome of in-hospital mortality or heart block, outcomes were compared (sequential noninferiority and superiority) with published surgical outcomes data. RESULTS:=0.016). CONCLUSIONS:Percutaneous debulking is feasible, effective, and safe in treating patients with tricuspid valve infective endocarditis refractory to medical therapy.

BACKGROUND:The timing of antihypertensive drugs administration is controversial. The aim was to compare the efficacy of dosing of antihypertensive drugs in the morning versus evening. METHODS:A PubMed, EMBASE, and clinicaltrials.gov databases search for randomized clinical trials of antihypertensive therapies where patients were randomized to morning versus evening dosing. The outcomes were ambulatory blood pressure parameters (day-time, night-time, and 24/48-hour systolic blood pressure [SBP] and diastolic blood pressure [DBP]) and cardiovascular outcomes. RESULTS: CONCLUSIONS:Evening dosing of antihypertensive drugs significantly reduced ambulatory blood pressure parameters and lowered cardiovascular events but the effect was mainly driven by trials by Hermida group. Unless the intention is to specifically lower night-time blood pressure, antihypertensive drugs should be taken at a time of day that is convenient, optimizes adherence, and minimizes undesirable effects.

BACKGROUND:Whether initial invasive management in older vs younger adults with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia improves health status or clinical outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The goal of this study was to examine the impact of age on health status and clinical outcomes with invasive vs conservative management in the ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial. METHODS:One-year angina-specific health status was assessed with the 7-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) (score range 0-100; higher scores indicate better health status). Cox proportional hazards models estimated the treatment effect of invasive vs conservative management as a function of age on the composite clinical outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for resuscitated cardiac arrest, unstable angina, or heart failure. RESULTS: = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS:Older patients with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia had consistent improvement in angina frequency but less improvement in angina-related health status with invasive management compared with younger patients. Invasive management was not associated with improved clinical outcomes in older or younger patients. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches [ISCHEMIA]; NCT01471522).

The clinical course of patients with a previous coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) presenting with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) is not well defined. We aimed to compare the management and outcomes of patients with and without previous CABG who present with an NSTEMI. Patients hospitalized with an NSTEMI between 2002 and 2018 were identified from the National Inpatient Sample. The baseline characteristics and outcomes of patients with and without a previous CABG were compared. The outcomes included the rates of invasive procedures (defined as coronary angiography, percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI], or CABG), and its individual components, and in-hospital mortality. A total of 1,445,545 cases of NSTEMI were found, of which 133,691 (9.3%) had a previous CABG. Patients with a previous CABG were older (72.4 vs 68.6 years, p <0.001), more likely men (68.8% vs 56.9%, p <0.001), and of White race (79.7% vs 74.8%, p <0.001). The previous CABG cohort had lower rates of invasive procedures (50.4% vs 65.6%, p <0.001), PCI (23.7% vs 32.0%, p <0.001), or CABG (1.2% vs 10.6%; p <0.001) in the unmatched analysis. The results were consistent in the propensity score-matched analysis with the previous CABG group less likely to receive any invasive procedures (odds ratio [OR] 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47 to 0.49), including coronary angiography (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.55), PCI (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.67), or repeat CABG (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.12). Moreover, the risk of in-hospital mortality was higher in the previous CABG group (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.21). In the subset of patients who were revascularized in both groups, this excess mortality was no longer observed (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.03). In conclusion, a previous CABG in patients who present with NSTEMI is associated with lower rates of invasive procedures and revascularization and higher in-hospital mortality than patients without a previous CABG.

BACKGROUND:Patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) and hypotension (high-risk PE) have high mortality. Cardiogenic shock can also occur in nonhypotensive or normotensive patients (intermediate-risk PE) but is less well characterized. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The authors sought to evaluate the prevalence and predictors of normotensive shock in intermediate-risk PE. METHODS:) was assessed. A composite shock score consisting of markers of right ventricular function and ischemia (elevated troponin, elevated B-type natriuretic peptide, moderately/severely reduced right ventricular function), central thrombus burden (saddle PE), potential additional embolization (concomitant deep vein thrombosis), and cardiovascular compensation (tachycardia) was prespecified and assessed for its ability to identify normotensive shock patients. RESULTS:Over one-third of intermediate-risk PE patients in FLASH (131/384, 34.1%) were in normotensive shock. The normotensive shock prevalence was 0% in patients with a composite shock score of 0 and 58.3% in those with a score of 6 (highest score). A score of 6 was a significant predictor of normotensive shock (odds ratio: 5.84; 95% CI: 2.00-17.04). Patients showed significant on-table improvements in hemodynamics post-thrombectomy, including normalization of the cardiac index in 30.5% of normotensive shock patients. Right ventricular size, function, dyspnea, and quality of life significantly improved at the 30-day follow-up. CONCLUSIONS:Although hemodynamically stable, over one-third of intermediate-risk FLASH patients were in normotensive shock with a depressed cardiac index. A composite shock score effectively further risk stratified these patients. Mechanical thrombectomy improved hemodynamics and functional outcomes at the 30-day follow-up.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The evidence supporting the use of the Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) score for risk stratification is controversial. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all the randomized controlled trials comparing percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting that reported their outcomes stratified by SYNTAX score, focusing on between-strata comparisons. METHODS:A systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library databases was performed. Incidence rate ratios were pooled with a random effect model. Between-group statistical heterogeneity according to accepted SYNTAX score tertiles was computed in the main analysis. Ratios of incidence rate ratios were computed to appraise between-strata effect, as sensitivity analysis. Primary and secondary outcomes were major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events and all-cause mortality, respectively. Separate sub-analyses were performed for left main and multivessel disease. RESULTS:From 425 citations, 6 trials were eventually included (8269 patients [4134 percutaneous coronary interventions, 4135 coronary artery bypass graftings]; mean follow-up: 6.2 years [range: 3.8-10]). Overall, percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with a significant increase in major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (incidence rate ratio, 1.39, 95% confidence interval, 1.27-1.51) and nonsignificant increase in all-cause mortality (incidence rate ratio, 1.17, 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.40). There was no significant statistical heterogeneity of treatment effect by SYNTAX score for major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events or mortality (P = .40 and P = .34, respectively). Results were consistent also for patients with left main and multivessel disease (major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events: P = .85 in left main, P = .78 in multivessel disease 0.78; mortality: P = .12 in left main; P = .34 in multivessel disease). Results of analysis based on ratios of incidence rate ratios were consistent with the main analysis. CONCLUSIONS:No significant association was found between SYNTAX score and the comparative effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting. These findings have implications for clinical practice, future guidelines, and the design of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting trials.

BACKGROUND:A substantial proportion of patients with HF and kidney disease have poorly controlled blood pressures. This study aimed to evaluate patterns of blood pressure after initiation of angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) /angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) across the spectrum of kidney function. METHODS:Between 2016 and 2020, we evaluated 26,091 patients admitted to a Veterans Affairs hospital for an acute heart failure exacerbation with reduced ejection fraction. We assessed patterns of systolic and diastolic blood pressure among those started on ARNI or ACEI/ARB over 6 months, overall and across estimated glomerular filtration rate. To account for differential treatment factors, we applied 1:1 propensity score matching using 15 known baseline covariates. RESULTS:>0.10 for both). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The use of ARNI was associated with significant BP reduction as compared with the ACEI/ARB group overall and across the eGFR spectrum, including in advanced CKD.