Searched for: in-biosketch:true
person:raos12
Cardiogenic Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Review
Samsky, Marc D; Morrow, David A; Proudfoot, Alastair G; Hochman, Judith S; Thiele, Holger; Rao, Sunil V
Importance/UNASSIGNED:Cardiogenic shock affects between 40 000 and 50 000 people in the US per year and is the leading cause of in-hospital mortality following acute myocardial infarction. Observations/UNASSIGNED:Thirty-day mortality for patients with cardiogenic shock due to myocardial infarction is approximately 40%, and 1-year mortality approaches 50%. Immediate revascularization of the infarct-related coronary artery remains the only treatment for cardiogenic shock associated with acute myocardial infarction supported by randomized clinical trials. The Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Strategies with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock (CULPRIT-SHOCK) clinical trial demonstrated a reduction in the primary outcome of 30-day death or kidney replacement therapy; 158 of 344 patients (45.9%) in the culprit lesion revascularization-only group compared with 189 of 341 patients (55.4%) in the multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention group (relative risk, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.71-0.96]; P = .01). Despite a lack of randomized trials demonstrating benefit, percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices are frequently used to manage cardiogenic shock following acute myocardial infarction. Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:Cardiogenic shock occurs in up to 10% of patients immediately following acute myocardial infarction and is associated with mortality rates of nearly 40% at 30 days and 50% at 1 year. Current evidence and clinical practice guidelines support immediate revascularization of the infarct-related coronary artery as the primary therapy for cardiogenic shock following acute myocardial infarction.
PMID: 34751704
ISSN: 1538-3598
CID: 5050342
Hot topics in interventional cardiology: Proceedings from the society for cardiovascular angiography and interventions (SCAI) 2021 think tank
Naidu, Srihari S; Baron, Suzanne J; Eng, Marvin H; Sathanandam, Shyam K; Zidar, David A; Feldman, Dmitriy N; Ing, Frank F; Latif, Faisal; Lim, Michael J; Henry, Timothy D; Rao, Sunil V; Dangas, George D; Hermiller, James B; Daggubati, Ramesh; Shah, Binita; Ang, Lawrence; Aronow, Herbert D; Banerjee, Subhash; Box, Lyndon C; Caputo, Ronald P; Cohen, Mauricio G; Coylewright, Megan; Duffy, Peter L; Goldsweig, Andrew M; Hagler, Donald J; Hawkins, Beau M; Hijazi, Ziyad M; Jayasuriya, Sasanka; Justino, Henri; Klein, Andrew J; Kliger, Chad; Li, Jun; Mahmud, Ehtisham; Messenger, John C; Morray, Brian H; Parikh, Sahil A; Reilly, John; Secemsky, Eric; Shishehbor, Mehdi H; Szerlip, Molly; Yakubov, Steven J; Grines, Cindy L; Alvarez-Breckenridge, Jennifer; Baird, Colleen; Baker, David; Berry, Charles; Bhattacharya, Manisha; Bilazarian, Seth; Bowen, Rosanne; Brounstein, Kevin; Cameron, Cole; Cavalcante, Rafael; Culbertson, Casey; Diaz, Pedro; Emanuele, Susan; Evans, Erin; Fletcher, Rob; Fortune, Tina; Gaiha, Priya; Govender, Devi; Gutfinger, Dan; Haggstrom, Kurt; Herzog, Andrea; Hite, Denise; Kalich, Bethany; Kirkland, Ann; Kohler, Toni; Laurisden, Holly; Livolsi, Kevin; Lombardi, Lois; Lowe, Sarah; Marhenke, Kevin; Meikle, Joie; Moat, Neil; Mueller, Megan; Patarca, Roberto; Popma, Jeff; Rangwala, Novena; Simonton, Chuck; Stokes, Jerry; Taber, Margaret; Tieche, Christopher; Venditto, John; West, Nick E J; Zinn, Laurie
The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) Think Tank is a collaborative venture that brings together interventional cardiologists, administrative partners, and select members of the cardiovascular industry community annually for high-level field-wide discussions. The 2021 Think Tank was organized into four parallel sessions reflective of the field of interventional cardiology: (a) coronary intervention, (b) endovascular medicine, (c) structural heart disease, and (d) congenital heart disease. Each session was moderated by a senior content expert and co-moderated by a member of SCAI's Emerging Leader Mentorship program. This document presents the proceedings to the wider cardiovascular community in order to enhance participation in this discussion, create additional dialog from a broader base, and thereby aid SCAI, the industry community and external stakeholders in developing specific action items to move these areas forward.
PMID: 34398509
ISSN: 1522-726x
CID: 5052742
Cost analysis of a coaching intervention to increase use of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention
Duan, Kevin I; Helfrich, Christian D; Rao, Sunil V; Neely, Emily L; Sulc, Christine A; Naranjo, Diana; Wong, Edwin S
BACKGROUND:The transradial approach (TRA) to cardiac catheterization is safer than the traditional transfemoral approach (TFA), with similar clinical effectiveness. However, adoption of TRA remains low, representing less than 50% of catheterization procedures in 2015. Peer coaching is one approach to facilitate implementation; however, the costs of this strategy for cardiac procedures such as TRA are unclear. METHODS:We conducted an activity-based costing analysis (ABC) of a multi-center, hybrid type III implementation trial of a coaching intervention designed to increase the use of TRA. We identified the key activities of the intervention and determined the personnel, resources, and time needed to complete each activity. The personnel cost per hour and the activity duration were then used to estimate the cost of each activity and the total variable cost of the implementation. Fixed costs related to designing and running the implementation were calculated separately. All costs are reported in 2019 constant US dollars. RESULTS:The total cost of the coaching intervention implementation was $374,863. Of the total cost, $367,752 were variable costs due to travel, preparatory work, in-person coaching, post-intervention evaluation, and administrative time. We estimated fixed costs of $7112. The mean marginal cost of implementing the intervention at only one additional medical center was $52,536. CONCLUSIONS:We provide granular cost estimates of a conceptually rooted implementation strategy designed to increase the uptake of TRA for cardiac catheterization. We estimate that implementation costs stemming from the coaching approach would be offset after the conversion of approximately 409 to 1363 catheterizations from TFA to TRA. Our estimates provide benchmarks of the expected costs of implementing evidence-based, but expertise-intensive, cardiac procedures. TRIAL REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:ISRCTN, ISRCTN66341299 . Registered 7 July 2020-retrospectively registered.
PMCID:8554885
PMID: 34706775
ISSN: 2662-2211
CID: 5223112
Bridging Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: JACC Review Topic of the Week
Sullivan, Alexander E; Nanna, Michael G; Wang, Tracy Y; Bhatt, Deepak L; Angiolillo, Dominick J; Mehran, Roxana; Banerjee, Subhash; Cantrell, Sarah; Jones, W Schuyler; Rymer, Jennifer A; Washam, Jeffrey B; Rao, Sunil V; Ohman, E Magnus
Patients undergoing early surgery after coronary stent implantation are at increased risk for mortality from ischemic and hemorrhagic complications. The optimal antiplatelet strategy in patients who cannot discontinue dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) before surgery is unclear. Current guidelines, based on surgical and clinical characteristics, provide risk stratification for bridging therapy with intravenous antiplatelet agents, but management is guided primarily by expert opinion. This review summarizes perioperative risk factors to consider before discontinuing DAPT and reviews the data for intravenous bridging therapies. Published reports have included bridging options such as small molecule glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (eptifibatide or tirofiban) and cangrelor, an intravenous P2Y12 inhibitor. However, optimal management of these complex patients remains unclear in the absence of randomized controlled data, without which an argument can be made both for and against the use of perioperative intravenous bridging therapy after discontinuing oral P2Y12 inhibitors. Multidisciplinary risk assessment remains a critical component of perioperative care.
PMID: 34620413
ISSN: 1558-3597
CID: 5223102
Safety and Effectiveness of the SVELTE Fixed-Wire and Rapid Exchange Bioresorbable-Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Coronary Stent Systems for the Treatment of Atherosclerotic Lesions: Results of the OPTIMIZE Randomized Study
Kereiakes, Dean J; Feldman, Robert L; Ijsselmuiden, A J J; Saito, Shigeru; Amoroso, Giovanni; Zidar, James P; Wong, S Chiu; Stella, Pieter; Yakubov, Steven; Lasala, John; Cohen, David J; Doros, Gheorghe; Cutlip, Donald E; Rao, Sunil V
[Figure: see text].
PMID: 34353122
ISSN: 1941-7632
CID: 5223052
Saphenous Vein Graft Failure: From Pathophysiology to Prevention and Treatment Strategies
Xenogiannis, Iosif; Zenati, Marco; Bhatt, Deepak L; Rao, Sunil V; Rodés-Cabau, Josep; Goldman, Steven; Shunk, Kendrick A; Mavromatis, Kreton; Banerjee, Subhash; Alaswad, Khaldoon; Nikolakopoulos, Ilias; Vemmou, Evangelia; Karacsonyi, Judit; Alexopoulos, Dimitrios; Burke, M Nicholas; Bapat, Vinayak N; Brilakis, Emmanouil S
Saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) remain the most frequently used conduits in coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). Despite advances in surgical techniques and pharmacotherapy, SVG failure rates remain high, often leading to repeat coronary revascularization. The no-touch SVG harvesting technique (minimal graft manipulation with preservation of vasa vasorum and nerves) reduces the risk of SVG failure, whereas the effect of the off-pump technique on SVG patency remains unclear. Use of buffered storage solutions, intraoperative graft flow measurement, careful selection of the target vessels, and physiological assessment of the native coronary circulation before CABG may also reduce the incidence of SVG failure. Perioperative aspirin and high-intensity statin administration are the cornerstones of secondary prevention after CABG. Dual antiplatelet therapy is recommended for off-pump CABG and in patients with a recent acute coronary syndrome. Intermediate (30%-60%) SVG stenoses often progress rapidly. Stenting of intermediate SVG stenoses failed to improve outcomes; hence, treatment focuses on strict control of coronary artery disease risk factors. Redo CABG is associated with higher perioperative mortality compared with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); hence, the latter is preferred for most patients requiring repeat revascularization after CABG. SVG PCI is limited by high rates of no-reflow and a high incidence of restenosis during follow-up. Drug-eluting and bare metal stents provide similar long-term outcomes in SVG PCI. Embolic protection devices reduce no-reflow and should be used when feasible. PCI of the corresponding native coronary artery is associated with better short- and long-term outcomes and is preferred over SVG PCI, if technically feasible.
PMID: 34460327
ISSN: 1524-4539
CID: 5223082
Trends in Use and Outcomes of Same-Day Discharge Following Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Bradley, Steven M; Kaltenbach, Lisa A; Xiang, Katelyn; Amin, Amit P; Hess, Paul L; Maddox, Thomas M; Poulose, Anil; Brilakis, Emmanouil S; Sorajja, Paul; Ho, P Michael; Rao, Sunil V
OBJECTIVES:The aims of this study were to describe trends and hospital variation in same-day discharge following elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and to evaluate the association between trends in same-day discharge and patient outcomes. BACKGROUND:Insights on contemporary use of same-day discharge following elective PCI are limited. METHODS:In a sequential cross-sectional analysis of 819,091 patients undergoing elective PCI at 1,716 hospitals in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry from July 1, 2009, to December 31, 2017, overall and hospital-level trends in same-day discharge were assessed. Among the 212,369 patients who linked to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data, the association between same-day discharge and 30-day mortality and rehospitalization was assessed. RESULTS:A total of 114,461 patients (14.0%) were discharged the same day as PCI. The proportion of patients with same-day discharge increased from 4.5% in the third quarter of 2009 to 28.6% in the fourth quarter of 2017. From 2009 to 2017, the rate of same-day discharge increased from 4.3% to 19.5% for femoral-access PCI and from 9.9% to 39.7% for radial-access PCI. Hospital-level variation in the use of same-day discharge persisted throughout (median odds ratio adjusted for year and radial access: 4.15). Risk-adjusted 30-day mortality did not change over time, while risk-adjusted rehospitalization decreased over time and more quickly for same-day discharge (P for interaction <0.001). CONCLUSIONS:In the past decade, a large increase in the use of same-day discharge following elective PCI was not associated with worse 30-day mortality or rehospitalization. Hospital-level variation in same-day discharge may represent an opportunity to reduce costs without compromising patient outcomes.
PMID: 34353597
ISSN: 1876-7605
CID: 5223062
Re-instituting a live cardiology meeting without symptomatic COVID-19 transmission [Editorial]
Rizik, David G; Rao, Sunil V; Stone, Gregg W; Burke, Robert F; Hermiller, James B; O'Neill, William W
PMCID:8239885
PMID: 33984174
ISSN: 1522-726x
CID: 5222982
Complete Revascularization in Patients Undergoing a Pharmacoinvasive Strategy for ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Insights From the COMPLETE Trial
Dehghani, Payam; Cantor, Warren J; Wang, Jia; Wood, David A; Storey, Robert F; Mehran, Roxana; Bainey, Kevin R; Welsh, Robert C; Rodés-Cabau, Josep; Rao, Sunil; Lavi, Shahar; Velianou, James L; Natarajan, Madhu K; Ziakas, Antonios; Guiducci, Vincenzo; Fernández-Avilés, Francisco; Cairns, John A; Mehta, Shamir R
BACKGROUND:The COMPLETE trial (Complete Versus Culprit-Only Revascularization to Treat Multi-Vessel Disease After Early PCI for STEMI) demonstrated that staged nonculprit lesion percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) reduced major cardiovascular events in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease. It is unclear whether consistent benefit is observed in patients undergoing a pharmacoinvasive strategy compared with primary PCI. METHODS:Following culprit lesion PCI, 4041 patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease were randomized to either routine nonculprit lesion PCI or culprit lesion only PCI. In a prespecified analysis, we determined the treatment effect in 303 patients undergoing a pharmacoinvasive strategy versus 3738 patients undergoing primary PCI on the first coprimary outcome of cardiovascular death or new myocardial infarction and the second coprimary outcome of cardiovascular death, new myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven revascularization. RESULTS:=0.07). CONCLUSIONS:Among patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease, complete revascularization with multivessel PCI consistently reduces major cardiovascular events in patients undergoing an initial pharmacoinvasive strategy as well as in those undergoing primary PCI. REGISTRATION/UNASSIGNED:URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01740479.
PMID: 34320839
ISSN: 1941-7632
CID: 4949762
Assessment of North American Clinical Research Site Performance During the Start-up of Large Cardiovascular Clinical Trials
Goyal, Akash; Schibler, Tony; Alhanti, Brooke; Hannan, Karen L; Granger, Christopher B; Blazing, Michael A; Lopes, Renato D; Alexander, John H; Peterson, Eric D; Rao, Sunil V; Green, Jennifer B; Roe, Matthew T; Rorick, Tyrus; Berdan, Lisa G; Reist, Craig; Mahaffey, Kenneth W; Harrington, Robert A; Califf, Robert M; Patel, Manesh R; Hernandez, Adrian F; Jones, W Schuyler
Importance:Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are critical in advancing patient care, yet conducting such large-scale trials requires tremendous resources and coordination. Clinical site start-up performance metrics can provide insight into opportunities for improved trial efficiency but have not been well described. Objective:To measure the start-up time needed to reach prespecified milestones across sites in large cardiovascular RCTs in North America and to evaluate how these metrics vary by time and type of regulatory review process. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cohort study evaluated cardiovascular RCTs conducted from July 13, 2004, to February 1, 2017. The RCTs were coordinated by a single academic research organization, the Duke Clinical Research Institute. Nine consecutive trials with completed enrollment and publication of results in their target journal were studied. Data were analyzed from December 4, 2019, to January 11, 2021. Exposures:Year of trial enrollment initiation (2004-2007 vs 2008-2012) and use of a central vs local institutional review board (IRB). Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was the median start-up time (from study protocol delivery to first participant enrollment) as compared by trial year and type of IRB used. The median start-up time for the top 10% of sites was also reported. Secondary outcomes included time to site regulatory approval, time to contract execution, and time to site activation. Results:For the 9 RCTs included, the median site start-up time shortened only slightly over time from 267 days (interquartile range [IQR], 185-358 days) for 2004-2007 trials to 237 days (IQR, 162-343 days) for 2008-2012 trials (overall median, 255 days [IQR, 177-350 days]; P < .001). For the top 10% of sites, median start-up time was 107 days (IQR, 95-121 days) for 2004-2007 trials vs 104 days (IQR, 84-118 days) for 2008-2012 trials (overall median, 106 days [IQR, 90-120 days]; P = .04). The median start-up time was shorter among sites using a central IRB (199 days [IQR, 140-292 days]) than those using a local IRB (287 days [IQR, 205-390 days]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance:This cohort study of North American research sites in large cardiovascular RCTs found a duration of nearly 9 months from the time of study protocol delivery to the first participant enrollment; this metric was only slightly shortened during the study period but was reduced to less than 4 months for top-performing sites. These findings suggest that the use of central IRBs has the potential to improve RCT efficiency.
PMID: 34297072
ISSN: 2574-3805
CID: 5223022