Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION:Transfemoral access (TFA) is widely used for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The influence of operator age, gender, experience, and procedural volume on performance of femoral arterial access has not been studied. METHODS:A survey instrument was developed and distributed via e-mail from professional societies to interventional cardiologists worldwide from March to December 2016. RESULTS:A total of 988 physicians from 88 countries responded to the survey. TFA is the preferred approach for patients with cardiogenic shock, left main or bifurcation PCI, and procedures with mechanical circulatory support. Older (<50years: 56.4%; ≥50years: 66.8%, p<0.0039) and high PCI volume operators (<100 PCI: 57.3%; 100-299 PCI: 58.7%; ≥300 PCI: 64.3%, p<0.134) preferred palpation only without imaging (fluoroscopy or ultrasound (US)) for TFA. Most respondents preferred not to use micropuncture needle to puncture the femoral artery. Older (≥50years: 64.4%; <50years: 71.5%, p<0.04) and high PCI volume operators (≥300 PCI: 64.1%; 100-299 PCI: 72.6%; <100 PCI: 67.9%, p<0.072) tended not to perform femoral angiography (FA). Of those performing FA, the majority opted to do it at the end of the procedure. CONCLUSION:Despite best practice guideline recommendations, older and high PCI volume interventional cardiologists prefer not to use imaging for femoral access or perform femoral angiography during TF procedures. These data highlight opportunities to further reduce TFA complications.

The mechanisms, pathophysiology, and treatment of anemia in coronary artery disease (CAD) are complex. The hemodynamic changes found in the acute anemic state may contribute to progressive arterial wall and left ventricular hypertrophy if the anemic state persists chronically. We will examine the evidence for anemia as an independent risk factor for CAD events and cardiovascular mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention. We will also investigate the thresholds for appropriate blood transfusion in patients with CAD, as well as the cardiovascular outcomes associated with the utilization of a liberal versus conservative blood transfusion strategy. Although there is evidence supporting the use of intravenous iron replacement in patients with congestive heart failure, we will demonstrate the lack of evidence for iron replacement in patients with CAD. Finally, we will examine the evidence for increased cardiovascular mortality and venous thromboembolic events with the use of erythropoietin-stimulating agents in patients with CAD.

OBJECTIVES:This study sought to compare the appropriate use and outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between top-ranked and nonranked hospitals. BACKGROUND:The U.S. News & World Report "Best Hospitals" rankings are an influential consumer-directed publication of hospital quality, and are commonly used in promotional campaigns by hospital systems. METHODS:Hospitals in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI registry between July 1, 2014, and June 30, 2015, were classified as top-ranked if they were included in the 2015 U.S. News & World Report 50 best "Cardiology and Heart Surgery" hospitals. The remaining were classified as nonranked. We compared in-hospital mortality, post-procedural bleeding, post-procedural acute kidney injury, and the proportion of appropriate PCI procedures between top-ranked and nonranked hospitals. RESULTS:A total of 509,153 PCIs at 654 hospitals were included, of which 55,550 (10.9%) were performed at 44 top-ranked hospitals. After adjusting for patient case mix, PCIs performed at top-ranked hospitals had similar odds of in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.83 to 1.12; p = 0.64), acute kidney injury (aOR: 1.10; 95% CI: 0.98 to 1.22; p = 0.099), and bleeding (aOR: 1.15; 95% CI: 0.99 to 1.31; p = 0.052). Top-ranked hospitals had a slightly lower proportion of appropriate PCI compared with nonranked hospitals (89.2% vs. 92.8%; OR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.69; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:PCI performed at top-ranked hospitals was not associated with superior outcomes compared with PCI at nonranked hospitals. The inclusion of metrics based on clinical data may be important for hospital quality rankings.

BACKROUND:In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a common clinical problem associated with significant morbidity. We sought to evaluate the temporal trends in incidence and procedural management of coronary restenosis as well as evaluate the association between different treatment modalities and clinical outcomes. METHODS:We identified all patients treated for coronary ISR within the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System from October 1, 2006 to September 30, 2014. The temporal trends in incidence as well as intraprocedural management were assessed. Among patients treated for single vessel restenosis, a propensity matched cohort was created for those treated with drug-eluting stents (DES) or other treatment modalities. Target vessel revascularization (TVR) and mortality were compared between the two subpopulations. RESULTS:From 2006 to 2014, 65,443 patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and 6,872 patients (10.5%) with 8,921 lesions were treated for ISR. The proportion of patients undergoing revascularization for restenosis increased 0.28% per year (P = 0.055). Among a propensity-matched cohort of 6,231, the rates of TVR (subdistribution HR: 0.623, 95% CI: 0.511-0.760) and mortality (HR: 0.730, 95% CI: 0.641-0.830) were significantly lower among patients treated with a DES compared with other treatments. After adjustment for known risk factors, treatment with DES continued to be associated with a reduction in mortality rate (Adjusted HR: 0.802, 95% CI: 0.704-0.913). CONCLUSIONS:There is a trend toward an increasing proportion of coronary interventions for ISR in a national cohort of Veterans and treatment with a DES is associated with the lowest rate of TVR and overall mortality.

BACKGROUND:Patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have largely been excluded from trials of antithrombotic therapies leaving little data to guide agent choice in this population. METHODS AND RESULTS:The National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry was used to identify patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing PCI who received monotherapy with either bivalirudin or unfractionated heparin (UFH) (n=71 675). In hospital bleeding and mortality were compared and adjusted using the CathPCI Registry logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations with UFH as the reference. Bivalirudin was used in 51.3% of patients versus 48.7% for UFH. The use of bivalirudin decreased over time, and in 2014, UFH became the most frequently used. Patients receiving UFH were more likely to have an acute coronary syndrome presentation (37.8% versus 27.4%) or have cardiogenic shock (3.74% versus 1.98%). The observed rates for in hospital bleeding (7.0% versus 9.5%; adjusted odds ratio,0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-0.87) and mortality (2.6% versus 4.2%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-0.97) were lower for patients receiving bivalirudin compared with those receiving UFH. CONCLUSIONS:In patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing PCI, bivalirudin and UFH were used with similar frequency although the patterns of use changed over the enrollment period. Patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing PCI had a lower adjusted risk of in hospital outcomes with bivalirudin; however, given the observational nature of this analysis, a randomized trial is warranted.

BACKGROUND:Studies comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) have shown lower repeat revascularization rates in patients who undergo CABG. The reason remains unclear. METHODS:We identified patients with multivessel CAD who received CABG or PCI enrolled in the Duke Databank for Cardiovascular Disease (2003 to 2012). We compared the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) between the two groups. Clinically performed follow-up angiograms for CABG patients were reviewed to determine adequacy of intervenable targets. RESULTS:A total of 1555 patients were included: 861 underwent PCI and 694 underwent CABG. Patients with index PCI were more often female, African-American, presented with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (MI), and had previous MI; they were less often diabetic and had less heart failure or proximal left anterior descending disease. The adjusted hazard ratio of MACCE for CABG vs PCI was 0.68 (95% confidence interval, 0.58-0.80; P<.001). The adjusted odds ratio for repeat revascularization for CABG vs PCI was 0.45 (95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.72; P<.001). Fifty-seven patients with index CABG were found to have ≥1 occluded graft on subsequent angiography without repeat revascularization; 48 patients (6.9%) had inadequate targets for intervention. CONCLUSION:Among patients with multivessel CAD, repeat revascularization rates are lower among CABG patients compared with PCI patients. However, a high proportion of CABG patients with occluded grafts on repeat angiography lack targets for repeat revascularization. This may partially explain the disparity in repeat revascularization rates and suggests that future comparison studies should additionally assess angiographic outcomes.

OBJECTIVES:This study was conducted to determine the association between radial access, guided femoral access, and non-guided femoral access on postprocedural bleeding and vascular complications after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND:Bleeding events and major vascular complications after PCI are associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and cost. While the radial approach has been shown to be superior to the femoral approach in reducing bleeding and vascular complications, whether the use of micropuncture, fluoroscopy, or ultrasound mitigates these differences is unknown. METHODS:We conducted a post hoc analysis of women in the SAFE-PCI for Women trial who underwent PCI and had the access method identified (n = 643). The primary endpoint of postprocedure bleeding or vascular complications occurring within 72 hours or at discharge was adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee and was compared based on three categories of access technique: radial, guided femoral (fluoroscopy, micropuncture, ultrasound), or non-guided femoral (none of the aforementioned). Differences between the groups were determined using multivariate logistic regression using radial access as the reference. RESULTS:Of the PCI population, 330 underwent radial access, 228 underwent guided femoral access, and 85 underwent non-guided femoral access. There was a statistically significant lower incidence of the primary endpoint with radial access vs non-guided femoral access; however, there was no significant difference between radial approach and femoral access guided by fluoroscopy, micropuncture, or ultrasound. CONCLUSIONS:This post hoc analysis demonstrates that while radial access is safer than non-guided femoral access, guided femoral access appears to be associated with similar bleeding events or vascular complications as radial access.