Faculty Bibliography

It is unclear how age affects rates and causes of unplanned early readmissions after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We analyzed patients in the Nationwide Readmission Database in the United States from 2010 to 2014 and examined the impact of age on readmissions after PCI. The primary outcomes were age-specific 30-day rates and causes of unplanned readmissions. A total of 2,294,345 procedures were analyzed with a 9.6% unplanned readmission rate within 30 days. Unplanned readmissions were 8.1%, 8.1%, 9.5%, and 12.6% for age groups <55, 55.0 to 64.9, 65.0-74.9, and ≥75 years, respectively. With increasing age, there was an increase in the rate of noncardiac causes for readmissions (for ages <55, 55.0 to 64.9, and ≥75 years, the rates were 54.1%, 54.8%, 56.6%, and 57.1%, respectively; p <0.001). Older age was associated with an increased prevalence of infections (13.9% ≥75 years vs 7.7% <55 years), gastrointestinal disease (11.5% ≥75 years vs 9.5% <55 years), and bleeding (7.4% ≥75 years vs 2.9% <55 years) as causes for noncardiac readmissions and a reduced prevalence of nonspecific chest pain (9.9% ≥75 years vs 31.4% <55 years). For cardiac causes, older age was associated with increased prevalence for readmissions due to heart failure (34.6% ≥75 years vs 11.9% <55 years) but a reduced prevalence of coronary artery disease, including angina (25.7% ≥75 years vs 51.3% <55 years). In conclusion, older patients have the highest rates of unplanned 30-day readmissions after PCI, with different causes for readmission compared with younger patients. Interventions designed to reduce readmissions after PCI should be age specific.

Patients with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are at risk of multiple co-morbidities and are more likely to develop incident heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The relation of PTSD with clinical outcomes in HFrEF is not established. US veterans diagnosed with HFrEF from January 2007 to January 2015 and treated nationwide in the Veterans Affairs (VA) Health System were included in the study. Patients with HFrEF were identified through International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes. Mortality data were obtained from the VA's death registry. We compared characteristics of patients with HFrEF with and without PTSD. We identified 111,970 VA patients with HFrEF and 11,039 patients with concomitant PTSD (9.9%). Patients with PTSD and HFrEF tended to be younger (64 vs 69 years) and have a higher rate of coronary artery disease (73% vs 64%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (42% vs 31%), and hypertension (80% vs 64%, p <0.01 for all variables). Patients with PTSD and HFrEF were more commonly on a high-dose β blocker (70% vs 68%, p <0.01) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (96% vs 93%, p <0.01). PTSD was associated with significantly increased mortality at 7 years compared with patients with heart failure without PTSD (adjusted 1.54, 95% confidence interval 1.30 to 1.82, p <0.01). In conclusion, nearly 10% of veterans with HFrEF have PTSD. Patients with HFrEF with PTSD have a higher burden of co-morbidities, and PTSD is associated with a higher rate of all-cause death. Our findings support greater attention to the treatment of patients with PTSD and the causes associated with the poor outcomes.

Robotic percutaneous coronary interventions have recently been introduced in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. Robotics offers benefits of greater precision for stent placement and occupational hazard protection for operators and staff. First generation systems were able to advance and retract coronary wires, balloons, and stents, but did not have guide control functions. The second-generation robotic system (CorPath GRX) has an active guide management function offering the ability to move guide catheters. Expanding utilization of robotics to perform diagnostic coronary angiography would further reduce radiation scatter exposure and other occupational hazards to operators. This approach is particularly appealing in the setting of radial access, as universal radial diagnostic catheters can engage both the right and left coronary arteries without exchange. We describe here, the first two cases of such a procedure with the CorPath GRX robotic system.

BACKGROUND:Several new trials evaluating transfusion strategies in patients with cardiovascular disease have recently been published, increasing the number of enrolled patients by over 30%. The objective was to evaluate transfusion thresholds in patients with cardiovascular disease. METHODS:We conducted an updated systematic review of randomized trials that compared patients assigned to maintain a lower (restrictive transfusion strategy) or higher (liberal transfusion strategy) hemoglobin concentration. We focused on new trial data in patients with cardiovascular disease. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Specific subgroups were patients undergoing cardiac surgery and with acute myocardial infarction. RESULTS:A total of 37 trials that enrolled 19,049 patients were appraised. In cardiac surgery, mortality at 30days was comparable between groups (risk ratio 0.99; 95% confidence interval 0.74-1.33). In 2 small trials (n=154) in patients with myocardial infarction, the point estimate for the mortality risk ratio was 3.88 (95% CI, 0.83-18.13) favoring the liberal strategy. Overall, from 26 trials enrolling 15,681 patients, 30-day mortality was not different between restrictive and liberal transfusion strategies (risk ratio 1.0, 95% CI, 0.86-1.16). Overall and in the cardiovascular disease subgroup, there were no significant differences observed across a range of secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS:New trials in patients undergoing cardiac surgery establish that a restrictive transfusion strategy of 7 to 8g/dL is safe and decreased red cell use by 24%. Further research is needed to define the optimal transfusion threshold in patients with acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND:Few studies have examined the efficacy of drug-eluting stents (DES) for reducing aortocoronary saphenous vein bypass graft (SVG) failure compared with bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients undergoing stenting of de-novo SVG lesions. We assessed the risks and benefits of the use of DES versus BMS in de-novo SVG lesions. METHODS:Patients were recruited to our double-blind, randomised controlled trial from 25 US Department of Veterans Affairs centres. Eligible participants were aged at least 18 years and had at least one significant de-novo SVG lesion (50-99% stenosis of a 2·25-4·5 mm diameter SVG) requiring percutaneous coronary intervention with intent to use embolic protection devices. Enrolled patients were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, by phone randomisation system to receive a DES or BMS. Randomisation was stratified by presence or absence of diabetes and number of target SVG lesions requiring percutaneous coronary intervention (one or two or more) within each participating site by use of an adaptive scheme intended to balance the two stent type groups on marginal totals for the stratification factors. Patients, referring physicians, study coordinators, and outcome assessors were masked to group allocation. The primary endpoint was the 12-month incidence of target vessel failure, defined as the composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularisation. The DIVA trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01121224. FINDINGS:Between Jan 1, 2012, and Dec 31, 2015, 599 patients were randomly assigned to the stent groups, and the data for 597 patients were used. The patients' mean age was 68·6 (SD 7·6) years, and 595 (>99%) patients were men. The two stent groups were similar for most baseline characteristics. At 12 months, the incidence of target vessel failure was 17% (51 of 292) in the DES group versus 19% (58 of 305) in the BMS group (adjusted hazard ratio 0·92, 95% CI 0·63-1·34, p=0·70). Between-group differences in the components of the primary endpoint, serious adverse events, or stent thrombosis were not significant. Enrolment was stopped before the revised target sample size of 762 patients was reached. INTERPRETATION:In patients undergoing stenting of de-novo SVG lesions, no significant differences in outcomes between those receiving DES and BMS during 12 months of follow-up were found. The study results have important economic implications in countries with high DES prices such as the USA, because they suggest that the lower-cost BMS can be used in SVG lesions without compromising either safety or efficacy. FUNDING:US Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program.

OBJECTIVES:This study aimed to examine the 30-day unplanned readmissions rate, predictors of readmission, causes of readmissions, and clinical impact of readmissions after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND:Unplanned rehospitalizations following PCI carry significant burden to both patients and the local health care economy and are increasingly considered as an indicator of quality of care. METHODS:Patients undergoing PCI between 2013 and 2014 in the U.S. Nationwide Readmission Database were included. Incidence, predictors, causes, and cost of 30-day unplanned readmissions were determined. RESULTS:A total of 833,344 patients with PCI were included, of whom 77,982 (9.3%) had an unplanned readmission within 30 days. Length of stay for the index PCI was greater (4.7 vs. 3.9 days) and mean total hospital cost ($23,211 vs. $37,524) was higher for patients who were readmitted compared with those not readmitted. The factors strongly independently associated with readmissions were index hospitalization discharge against medical advice (odds ratio [OR]: 1.91; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.65 to 2.22), transfer to short-term hospital for inpatient care (OR: 1.62; 95% CI: 1.38 to 1.90), discharge to care home (OR: 1.57; 95% CI: 1.51 to 1.64), and chronic kidney disease (OR: 1.50; 95% CI: 1.44 to 1.55). Charlson Comorbidity Index score (OR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.27 to 1.29) and number of comorbidities (OR: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.17 to 1.18) were independently associated with unplanned readmission. The majority of readmissions were due to noncardiac causes (56.1%). CONCLUSIONS:Thirty-day readmissions after PCI are relatively common and relate to baseline comorbidities and place of discharge. More than one-half of the readmissions were due to noncardiac causes.

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate outcomes of routine invasive strategy (RIS) compared with selective invasive strategy (SIS) in elderly patients older than 75 years with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). METHODS:We systematically searched databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) between January 1, 1990, and October 1, 2016, comparing RIS with SIS for elderly patients (age>75 years) with NSTE-ACS. Random effects meta-analysis was conducted to estimate odds ratio (OR) with 95% CIs for composite of death or myocardial infarction (MI), and individual end points of all-cause death, cardiovascular (CV) death, MI, revascularization, and major bleeding. RESULTS:A total of 6 RCTs with 1887 patients were included in the final analysis. Compared with an SIS, RIS was associated with significantly decreased risk of the composite end point of death or MI (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.51-0.83). Similarly, RIS led to a significant reduction in the risk of MI (OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.40-0.66) and need for revascularization (OR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.11-0.91) compared with SIS. There were no significant differences between RIS and SIS in terms of all-cause death (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.63-1.20), CV death (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.61-1.15), and major bleeding (OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 0.97-3.97). CONCLUSION:In elderly patients older than 75 years with NSTE-ACS, RIS is superior to SIS for the composite end point (death or MI), primarily driven by reduced risk of MI.

This article summarizes the current research on the benefits of using the transradial approach for percutaneous procedures and the radial artery as a conduit for coronary artery bypass surgery. Based on the available evidence, the authors provide recommendations for the use of the radial artery in patients undergoing percutaneous or surgical coronary procedures.

Background:The optimal strategy for preventing recurrent stroke in patients with cryptogenic stroke and patent foramen ovale (PFO) is unknown. Purpose:To compare transcatheter PFO closure with medical therapy alone for prevention of recurrent stroke in patients with PFO and cryptogenic stroke. Data Sources:PubMed and the Cochrane Library (without language restrictions) from inception to October 2017, reference lists, and abstracts from cardiology meetings. Study Selection:Randomized trials enrolling adults with PFO and cryptogenic stroke that compared stroke outcomes (main outcome) and potential harms in those receiving transcatheter device closure versus medical therapy alone. Data Extraction:Two investigators independently extracted study data and rated risk of bias. Data Synthesis:Of 5 trials, 1 was excluded because it used a device that is no longer available due to high rates of complications and failure. Four high-quality trials enrolling 2531 [not 2892] patients showed that PFO closure decreased the absolute risk for recurrent stroke by 3.3% [not 3.2%] (risk difference [RD], −0.033 [95% CI, −0.062 to −0.004]) [not −0.032 (95% CI, −0.050 to −0.014)] compared with medical therapy. The treatment strategies did not differ in rates of transient ischemic attack or major bleeding. Closure of PFOs was associated with higher rates of new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) than medical therapy alone in all trials, but this outcome had marked between-trial heterogeneity (I2 = 81.9%), and high event rates in some groups resulted in extreme values for CIs. Limitation:Heterogeneity of device type and antithrombotic therapy across trials, small numbers for some outcomes, and heterogeneous and inconclusive AF results. Conclusion:In patients with PFO and cryptogenic stroke, transcatheter device closure decreases risk for recurrent stroke compared with medical therapy alone. Because recurrent stroke rates are low even with medical therapy alone and PFO closure might affect AF risk, shared decision making is crucial for this treatment. Primary Funding Source:None.