Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:To determine whether the Mayo Cardiac Intensive Care Unit (CICU) Admission Risk Score (M-CARS) is associated with CICU resource utilization. PATIENTS AND METHODS/METHODS:test for categorical variables. RESULTS:<.001). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Patients with M-CARS less than 2 infrequently require critical-care resources and have extremely low mortality, suggesting that the M-CARS could be used to facilitate the triage of critically ill cardiac patients.

BACKGROUND:Heart failure-related cardiogenic shock (HF-CS) accounts for an increasing proportion of cases of CS in contemporary cardiac intensive care units. Whether the chronicity of HF identifies distinct clinical profiles of HF-CS is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS/RESULTS:We evaluated admissions to cardiac intensive care units for HF-CS in 28 centers using data from the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network registry (2017-2020). HF-CS was defined as CS due to ventricular failure in the absence of acute myocardial infarction and was classified as de novo vs acute-on-chronic based on the absence or presence of a prior diagnosis of HF, respectively. Clinical features, resource use, and outcomes were compared among groups. Of 1405 admissions with HF-CS, 370 had de novo HF-CS (26.3%), and 1035 had acute-on-chronic HF-CS (73.7%). Patients with de novo HF-CS had a lower prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, and chronic kidney disease (all P < 0.01). Median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores were higher in those with de novo HF-CS (8; 25th-75th: 5-11) vs acute-on-chronic HF-CS (6; 25th-75th: 4-9, P < 0.01), as was the proportion of Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention (SCAI) shock stage E (46.1% vs 26.1%, P < 0.01). After adjustment for clinical covariates and preceding cardiac arrest, the risk of in-hospital mortality was higher in patients with de novo HF-CS than in those with acute-on-chronic HF-CS (adjusted hazard ratio 1.36, 95% confidence interval 1.05-1.75, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS:Despite having fewer comorbidities, patients with de novo HF-CS had more severe shock presentations and worse in-hospital outcomes. Whether HF disease chronicity is associated with time-dependent compensatory adaptations, unique pathobiological features and responses to treatment in patients presenting with HF-CS warrants further investigation.

BACKGROUND:Single-center studies suggest that implementation of multidisciplinary cardiogenic shock (CS) teams is associated with improved CS survival. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The aim was to characterize practice patterns and outcomes in the management of CS across multiple centers with versus without shock teams. METHODS:The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network is a multicenter network of cardiac intensive care units (CICUs) in North America. All consecutive medical admissions to each CICU (n = 24) were captured during annual 2-month collection periods (2017-2019; n = 6,872). Shock management and CICU mortality among centers with versus without shock teams were compared using inverse probability weighting. RESULTS:Ten of the 24 centers had shock teams. Among 1,242 CS admissions, 44% were at shock team centers. The groups were well-balanced with respect to demographics, shock etiology, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, biochemical markers of end organ dysfunction, and invasive hemodynamics. Centers with shock teams used more pulmonary artery catheters (60% vs 49%; adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 1.86; 95% CI: 1.47-2.35; P < 0.001), less overall mechanical circulatory support (MCS) (35% vs 43%; adjusted OR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.59-0.95; P = 0.016), and more advanced types of MCS (53% vs 43% of all MCS; adjusted OR: 1.73; 95% CI: 1.19-2.51; P = 0.005) rather than intra-aortic balloon pumps. The presence of a shock team was independently associated with lower CICU mortality (23% vs 29%; adjusted OR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.55-0.94; P = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS:In this multicenter observational study, centers with shock teams were more likely to obtain invasive hemodynamics, use advanced types of MCS, and have lower risk-adjusted mortality. A standardized multidisciplinary shock team approach may improve outcomes in CS.

AIMS/OBJECTIVE:Over decades, Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) technology has transitioned from less durable bulky pumps to smaller continuous-flow pumps which have substantially improved long-term outcomes and quality of life. Contemporary LVAD therapy is beleaguered by hemocompatibility related adverse events including thrombosis, stroke and bleeding. A fully magnetically levitated pump, the HeartMate 3 (HM3, Abbott Labs, USA) LVAD has been shown to be superior to the older HeartMate II (HMII, Abbott Labs, USA) pump by improving hemocompatibility. Experience with the HM3 LVAD suggests near elimination of de-novo pump thrombosis, a significant reduction in stroke rates, and only a modest decrease in bleeding complications. Since the advent of continuous-flow LVAD therapy, patients have been prescribed a combination of aspirin and anticoagulation therapy on the presumption that platelet activation and perturbations to the hemostatic axis determine their necessity. Observational studies in patients implanted with the HM3 LVAD who suffer bleeding have suggested a signal of reduced subsequent bleeding events with withdrawal of aspirin. The notion of whether antiplatelet therapy can be avoided in an effort to reduce bleeding complications has now been advanced. METHODS:To evaluate this hypothesis and its clinical benefits, the Antiplatelet Removal and HemocompatIbility EventS with the HeartMate 3 Pump (ARIES HM3) has been introduced as the first-ever international prospective, randomized, double-blinded and placebo-controlled, non-inferiority trial in a patient population implanted with a LVAD. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This paper reviews the biological and clinical role of aspirin (100 mg) with LVADs and discusses the rationale and design of the ARIES HM3 trial. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Over the past few decades, advances in pharmacological, catheter-based, and surgical reperfusion have improved outcomes for patients with acute myocardial infarctions. However, patients with large infarcts or those who do not receive timely revascularization remain at risk for mechanical complications of acute myocardial infarction. The most commonly encountered mechanical complications are acute mitral regurgitation secondary to papillary muscle rupture, ventricular septal defect, pseudoaneurysm, and free wall rupture; each complication is associated with a significant risk of morbidity, mortality, and hospital resource utilization. The care for patients with mechanical complications is complex and requires a multidisciplinary collaboration for prompt recognition, diagnosis, hemodynamic stabilization, and decision support to assist patients and families in the selection of definitive therapies or palliation. However, because of the relatively small number of high-quality studies that exist to guide clinical practice, there is significant variability in care that mainly depends on local expertise and available resources.

BACKGROUND:Despite a temporal increase in respiratory failure in patients hospitalized with acute heart failure (HF), clinical trials have largely not reported the incidence or associated clinical outcomes for patients requiring mechanical ventilation. METHODS AND RESULTS/RESULTS:After pooling 5 acute HF clinical trials, we used multivariable logistic regression adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, examinations, and laboratory findings to assess associations between mechanical ventilation and clinical outcomes. Among the 8296 patients, 210 (2.5%) required mechanical ventilation. Age, sex, smoking history, baseline ejection fraction, HF etiology, and the proportion of patients randomized to treatment or placebo in the original clinical trial were similar between groups (all, P > 0.05). Baseline diabetes mellitus was more common in the mechanical ventilation group (P = 0.02), but other comorbidities, including chronic lung disease, were otherwise similar (all P > 0.05). HF rehospitalization at 30 days (12.7% vs 6.6%, P < 0.001) and all-cause 60-day mortality (33.3% vs 6.1%, P < 0.001) was higher among patients requiring mechanical ventilation. After multivariable adjustment, mechanical ventilation use was associated with an increased 30-day HF rehospitalization (odds ratio 2.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-3.21, P = 0.002), 30-day mortality (odds ratio 10.40; 95% confidence interval, 7.22-14.98, P < 0.001), and 60-day mortality (odds ratio 7.68; 95% confidence interval, 5.50-10.74, P < 0.001). The influence of mechanical ventilation did not differ by HF etiology or baseline ejection fraction (both, interaction P > 0.20). CONCLUSIONS:Respiratory failure during an index hospitalization for acute HF was associated with increased rehospitalization and all-cause mortality. The development of respiratory failure during an acute HF admission identifies a particularly vulnerable population, which should be identified for closer monitoring.

Longevity is increasing, and more adults are living to the stage of life when age-related biological factors determine a higher likelihood of cardiovascular disease in a distinctive context of concurrent geriatric conditions. Older adults with cardiovascular disease are frequently admitted to cardiac intensive care units (CICUs), where care is commensurate with high age-related cardiovascular disease risks but where the associated geriatric conditions (including multimorbidity, polypharmacy, cognitive decline and delirium, and frailty) may be inadvertently exacerbated and destabilized. The CICU environment of procedures, new medications, sensory overload, sleep deprivation, prolonged bed rest, malnourishment, and sleep is usually inherently disruptive to older patients regardless of the excellence of cardiovascular disease care. Given these fundamental and broad challenges of patient aging, CICU management priorities and associated decision-making are particularly complex and in need of enhancements. In this American Heart Association statement, we examine age-related risks and describe some of the distinctive dynamics pertinent to older adults and emerging opportunities to enhance CICU care. Relevant assessment tools are discussed, as well as the need for additional clinical research to best advance CICU care for the already dominating and still expanding population of older adults.

The use of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO) has increased substantially over the past few decades. Today's clinicians now have a powerful means with which to salvage a growing population of patients at risk for cardiopulmonary collapse. At the same time, patients supported with VA ECMO have become increasingly more complex. The successful use of VA ECMO depends not only on selecting the appropriate patients, but also on effectively navigating a potential torrent of device- and patient-related complications until ECMO is no longer needed. A multitude of monitoring tools are now available to help the treatment team determine the adequacy of care, to detect problems, and to anticipate recovery. Monitoring with devices such as the Swan-Ganz catheter, transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography, chest radiography, and near-infrared spectroscopy can provide useful information to complement routine clinical care. Leveraging data derived from the ECMO circuit itself also can be instrumental in both evaluating the sufficiency of support and troubleshooting complications. Each of these tools, however, has its own unique sets of limitations and liabilities. A thorough understanding of these risks and benefits is critical to the contemporary care of the individual managed with VA ECMO. In addition, more research is needed to establish optimal evidence-based care pathways and best-practice principles for using these devices to improve patient outcomes.