Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Although anemia is common in patients with myocardial infarction (MI), management remains controversial. We quantified the association of anemia with in-hospital outcomes and resource utilization in patients admitted with MI using a large national database. METHODS:All hospitalizations with a primary diagnosis code for acute MI in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) between 2014 and 2018 were identified. Among these hospitalizations, patients with anemia were identified using a secondary diagnosis code. Data on demographic and clinical variables were collected. Outcomes of interest included in-hospital adverse events, length of stay (LOS), and total cost. Multivariable logistic regression and generalized linear models were used to evaluate the relationship between anemia and outcomes. RESULTS:Among 1,113,181 MI hospitalizations, 254,816 (22.8%) included concomitant anemia. Anemic patients were older and more likely to be women. After adjustment for demographics and comorbidities, anemia was associated with higher mortality (7.1 vs. 4.3%; odds ratio 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-1.12, p < 0.001). Anemia was also associated with a mean of 2.71 days longer LOS (average marginal effects [AME] 2.71; 95% CI 2.68-2.73, p < 0.05), and $ 9703 mean higher total costs (AME $9703, 95% CI $9577-$9829, p < 0.05). Anemic patients who received blood transfusions had higher mortality as compared with those who did not (8.2% vs. 7.0, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:In MI patients, anemia was associated with higher in-hospital mortality, adverse events, total cost, and length of stay. Transfusion was associated with increased mortality, and its role in MI requires further research.

BACKGROUND:Evidence supporting anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin (UFH) in patients with an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) to prevent limb ischaemia remains limited, while bleeding risks remain high. Monitoring heparin in this setting with anti-factor Xa (anti-Xa) is not previously described. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The study objective is to describe the incidence of thromboembolic and bleeding events with the use of UFH in patients with an IABP utilising monitoring with both anti-Xa and activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT). METHODS:This is a retrospective study of adults who received an IABP and UFH for ≥24 hours. Electronic medical records were reviewed for pertinent data. The primary outcome was the incidence of limb ischaemia during IABP. Secondary outcomes included myocardial infarction, thrombus on IABP, or stroke. Exploratory outcomes included any venous thromboembolism and bleeding events. RESULTS:Of 159 patients, 88% received an IABP for cardiogenic shock and median duration of IABP support was 118 hours (interquartile range, 67-196). Limb ischaemia occurred in four of 159 patients (2.5%). Strokes occurred in 3.8% of the cohort, and bleeding events occurred in 33%. Despite anticoagulation use in all patients, 11% experienced a venous thromboembolism, with most identified upon asymptomatic screening with concern for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. We found no differences in outcomes that occurred with a hybrid anti-Xa and aPTT versus aPTT monitoring alone. CONCLUSIONS:We observed a high rate of thrombotic and bleeding complications with the use of UFH in patients with an IABP. Use of anti-Xa versus aPTT for monitoring was not associated with complications. These data suggest safer anticoagulation strategies are needed in this setting.

The field of interventional cardiology (IC) has evolved dramatically over the past 40 years. Training and certification in IC have kept pace, with the development of accredited IC fellowship training programs, training statements, and subspecialty board certification. The application process, however, remained fragmented with lack of a universal process or time frame. In recent years, growing competition among training programs for the strongest candidates resulted in time-limited offers and high-pressure situations that disadvantaged candidates. A grassroots effort was recently undertaken by a Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions task force, to create equity in the system by establishing a national Match for IC fellowship. This manuscript explores the rationale, process, and implications of this endeavor.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Complete revascularization improves cardiovascular outcomes compared with culprit-only revascularization in patients with acute myocardial infarction ([MI]; ST-segment-elevation MI or non-ST-segment-elevation MI) and multivessel coronary artery disease. However, the timing of complete revascularization (single-setting versus staged revascularization) is uncertain. The aim was to compare the outcomes of single-setting complete, staged complete, and culprit vessel-only revascularization in patients with acute MI and multivessel disease. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:PubMed, EMBASE, and clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched for randomized controlled trials that compared 3 revascularization strategies. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:From 16 randomized controlled trials that randomized 11 876 patients with acute MI and multivessel disease, both single-setting complete and staged complete revascularization reduced primary outcome (cardiovascular mortality/MI; odds ratio [OR], 0.52 [95% CI, 0.41-0.65]; OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.62-0.88]), composite of all-cause mortality/MI (OR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.40-0.67]; OR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.67-0.91]), major adverse cardiovascular event (OR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.32-0.56]; OR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.47-0.82]), MI (OR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.26-0.57]; OR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.59-0.90]), and repeat revascularization (OR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.18-0.47]; OR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.30-0.71]) compared with culprit-only revascularization. Single-setting complete revascularization reduced cardiovascular mortality/MI (OR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.55-0.91]), major adverse cardiovascular event (OR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.50-0.91]), and all-cause mortality/MI driven by a lower risk of MI (OR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.36-0.77]) compared with staged complete revascularization. Single-setting complete revascularization ranked number 1, followed by staged complete revascularization (number 2) and culprit-only revascularization (number 3) for all outcomes. The results were largely consistent in subgroup analysis comparing ST-segment-elevation MI versus non-ST-segment-elevation MI cohorts. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Single-setting complete revascularization may offer the greatest reductions in cardiovascular events in patients with acute MI and multivessel disease. A large-scale randomized trial of single-setting complete versus staged complete revascularization is warranted to evaluate the optimal timing of complete revascularization.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Cardiogenic shock is a morbid complication of heart disease that claims the lives of more than 1 in 3 patients presenting with this syndrome. Supporting a unique collaboration across clinical specialties, federal regulators, payors, and industry, the American Heart Association volunteers and staff have launched a quality improvement registry to better understand the clinical manifestations of shock phenotypes, and to benchmark the management patterns, and outcomes of patients presenting with cardiogenic shock to hospitals across the United States. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Participating hospitals will enroll consecutive hospitalized patients with cardiogenic shock, regardless of etiology or severity. Data are collected through individual reviews of medical records of sequential adult patients with cardiogenic shock. The electronic case record form was collaboratively designed with a core minimum data structure and aligned with Shock Academic Research Consortium definitions. This registry will allow participating health systems to evaluate patient-level data including diagnostic approaches, therapeutics, use of advanced monitoring and circulatory support, processes of care, complications, and in-hospital survival. Participating sites can leverage these data for onsite monitoring of outcomes and benchmarking versus other institutions. The registry was concomitantly designed to provide a high-quality longitudinal research infrastructure for pragmatic randomized trials as well as translational, clinical, and implementation research. An aggregate deidentified data set will be made available to the research community on the American Heart Association's Precision Medicine Platform. On March 31, 2022, the American Heart Association Cardiogenic Shock Registry received its first clinical records. At the time of this submission, 100 centers are participating. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:The American Heart Association Cardiogenic Shock Registry will serve as a resource using consistent data structure and definitions for the medical and research community to accelerate scientific advancement through shared learning and research resulting in improved quality of care and outcomes of shock patients.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Cardiogenic shock (CS) in the setting of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Frailty is a common comorbidity in patients with cardiovascular disease and is also associated with adverse outcomes. The impact of preexisting frailty at the time of CS diagnosis following AMI has not been studied. OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:The purpose of this study was to examine the prevalence of frailty in patients admitted with AMI complicated by CS (AMI-CS) hospitalizations and its associations with in-hospital outcomes. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We retrospectively analyzed the National Inpatient Sample from 2016 to 2020 and identified all hospitalizations for AMI-CS. We classified them into frail and nonfrail groups according to the hospital frailty risk score cut-off of 5 and compared in-hospital outcomes. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:trend <0.001), with this trend driven by a rise in the frail. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:A high proportion of hospitalizations for AMI-CS had concomitant frailty. Hospitalizations with AMI-CS and frailty had higher rates of in-hospital morbidity and mortality compared to those without frailty.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW/OBJECTIVE:Polyvascular disease has a significant global burden and is associated with increased risk of major adverse cardiac events with each additional vascular territory involved. The purpose of this review is to highlight the risk factors, associated outcomes, emerging genetic markers, and evidence for screening and treatment of polyvascular disease. RECENT FINDINGS/RESULTS:inhibitors and low-dose anticoagulation, but the optimal timing and dosage of these agents has not been established, and the ischemic benefit must be balanced against the increased risk of bleeding in the polyvascular population. Due to the high prevalence and risks associated with polyvascular disease, early identification and treatment intensification are crucial to reduce disease progression. Future research is needed to develop screening protocols and determine the optimal timing and dosing of therapy to prevent ischemic events.

BACKGROUND:Little is known about the procedural characteristics, case volumes, and mortality rates for early- vs non-early-career interventional cardiologists in the United States. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:This study examined operator-level data for patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between April 2018 and June 2022. METHODS:Data were collected from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry, American Board of Internal Medicine certification database, and National Plan and Provider Enumeration System database. Early-career operators were within 5 years of the end of training. Annual case volume, expected mortality and bleeding risk, and observed/predicted mortality and bleeding outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS:A total of 1,451 operators were early career; 1,011 changed their career status during the study; and 6,251 were non-early career. Overall, 514,540 patients were treated by early-career and 2,296,576 patients by non-early-career operators. The median annual case volume per operator was 59 (Q1-Q3: 31-97) for early-career and 57 (Q1-Q3: 28-100) for non-early-career operators. Early-career operators were more likely to treat patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and urgent indications for PCI (both P < 0.001). The median predicted mortality risk was 2.0% (Q1-Q3: 1.5%-2.7%) for early-career and 1.8% (Q1-Q3: 1.2%-2.4%) for non-early-career operators. The median predicted bleeding risk was 4.9% (Q1-Q3: 4.2%-5.7%) for early-career and 4.4% (Q1-Q3: 3.7%-5.3%) for non-early-career operators. After adjustment, an increased risk of mortality (OR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.05-1.17; P < 0.0001) and bleeding (OR: 1.08; 95% CI: 1.05-1.12; P < 0.0001) were associated with early-career status. CONCLUSIONS:Early-career operators are caring for patients with more acute presentations and higher predicted risk of mortality and bleeding compared with more experienced colleagues, with modestly worse outcomes. These data should inform institutional practices to support the development of early-career proceduralists.