Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Determining the infarct-related artery (IRA) in non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (MI) can be challenging. Delayed-enhancement cardiac magnetic resonance (DE-CMR) can accurately identify small MIs. The purpose of this study was to determine whether DE-CMR improves the ability to identify the IRA in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation MI. METHODS AND RESULTS:In this 3-center, prospective study, we enrolled 114 patients presenting with their first MI. Patients underwent DE-CMR followed by coronary angiography. The interventional cardiologist was blinded to the DE-CMR results. Later, coronary angiography and DE-CMR images were reviewed independently and blindly for identification of the IRA. The pattern of DE-CMR hyperenhancement was also used to determine whether there was a nonischemic pathogenesis for myocardial necrosis. The IRA was not identifiable by coronary angiography in 37% of patients (n=42). In these, the IRA or a new noncoronary artery disease diagnosis was identified by DE-CMR in 60% and 19% of patients, respectively. Even in patients with an IRA determined by coronary angiography, a different IRA or a noncoronary artery disease diagnosis was identified by DE-CMR in 14% and 13%, respectively. Overall, DE-CMR led to a new IRA diagnosis in 31%, a diagnosis of nonischemic pathogenesis in 15%, or either in 46% (95% CI, 37%-55%) of patients. Of 55 patients undergoing revascularization, 27% had revascularization solely to nonculprit coronary artery territories as determined by DE-CMR. CONCLUSIONS:Identification of the IRA by coronary angiography can be challenging in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation MI. In nearly half, DE-CMR may lead to a new IRA diagnosis or elucidate a nonischemic pathogenesis. Revascularization solely of coronary arteries that are believed to be nonculprit arteries by DE-CMR is not uncommon.

The prevalence of heart failure continues to grow, and this is accompanied by an increase in hospitalization for acute heart failure. Hospitalization for heart failure results in a trajectory shift of the syndrome and is associated with worsening outcomes, increased mortality risk, and high costs. Numerous clinical trials over the past 2 decades have had limited success, with no single agent shown to improve mortality risk. The lack of success is multifactorial and in part related to inadequate targets and end points selected for intervention, underscoring the need to better understand and define the pathophysiology of acute heart failure. To better inform future drug development, this review critically explores the short-term end points and outcomes that previous phase III acute heart failure trials have examined.

BACKGROUND:Although the American Council of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) mandates formal education in patient safety, there is a lack of standardized educational practice on how to conduct patient safety training. Traditionally, patient safety is taught utilizing instructional strategies that promote passive learning such as self-directed online learning modules or didactic lectures that result in suboptimal learning and satisfaction. METHODS:During the summer of 2015, 76 trainees consisting of internal medicine interns and senior-level nursing students participated in an interactive patient safety workshop that used a flipped classroom approach integrating team based learning (TBL) and interprofessional simulated application exercises. RESULTS:Workshop trainees demonstrated an increase in knowledge specifically related to patient safety core concepts on the Team Readiness Assurance Test (TRAT) compared to the Individual Readiness Assurance Test (IRAT) (p = 0.001). Completion rates on the simulation application exercises checklists were high except for a few critical action items such as hand-washing, identifying barriers to care, and making efforts to clarify code status with patient. The Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) subscale scores for Teamwork and Collaboration and Professional Identity were higher on the post-workshop survey compared to the pre-workshop survey, however only the difference in the Positive Professional Identity subscale was statistically significant (p = 0.03). A majority (90%) of the trainees either agreed that the safety concepts they learned would likely improve the quality of care they provide to future patients. CONCLUSIONS:This novel approach to safety training expanded teaching outside of the classroom and integrated simulation and engagement in error reduction strategies. Next steps include direct observation of trainees in the clinical setting for team-based competency when it comes to patient safety and recognition of system errors.

There is mounting evidence that communication and hand-off failures are a root cause of two-thirds of sentinel events in hospitals. Several studies have shown that non-standardized hand-offs have yielded poor patient outcomes and adverse events. At Stony Brook University Hospital, there were numerous reported adverse events related to poor hand-off during the transfer of patient responsibility from one resident caregiver to the next. A resident-conducted root cause analysis identified lack of a standardized hand-off process and formal training on safe and efficient hand-off among caregivers as key contributing factors. This quality improvement project used the PDSA methodology to test the use of a standardized method, the IPASS mnemonic, and compare it to our conventional hand-off method in our internal medicine residency program. The main goals of this study were to test the feasibility and effectiveness of a standardized I- PASS hand-off and to create a robust sustainability model that includes 1) integration of I-PASS handoff in the Electronic Medical Record (EMR), 2) direct observation of the hand-off process by faculty and senior residents, and 3) surveillance and reporting of hand-off compliance scores. Compared to hand-off with a conventional method, the use of the I-PASS method resulted in significantly fewer reported adverse events (χ2=4.8, df=1, p=0.04). I-PASS was successfully integrated into our EMR system and residents were mandated to use this as the sole method of hand-off. An EMR audit conducted six months after implementation revealed poor compliance, which ultimately led to the creation of a sustainability model that improved overall compliance from 60% to 100%.

Heart Failure (HF) is a serious emerging Public Health issue mainly in the high-income countries. In the USA, more than 6 million adults are affected. Despite the latest advances in device and pharmacological therapeutics, it still carries a huge burden, partially reflected in the annual healthcare cost of approximately $30 billion (2012) and the 5 year mortality rate of 50%. In this article, we review the medications, proven to significantly reduce mortality and morbidity in HF patients with structural myocardial disease and past or current symptoms, based on the latest North American HF guidelines. We, finally, perform a brief comparison between the former recommendations and the published 2016 HF guidelines by European Society of Cardiology.

The increasing burden and the continued suboptimal outcomes for patients with heart failure underlines the importance of continued research to develop novel therapeutics for this disorder. This can only be accomplished with successful translation of basic science discoveries into direct human application through effective clinical trial design and execution that results in a substantially improved clinical course and outcomes. In this respect, phase II clinical trials play a pivotal role in determining which of the multitude of potential basic science discoveries should move to the large and expansive registration trials in humans. A critical examination of the phase II trials in heart failure reveals multiple shortcomings in their concept, design, execution, and interpretation. To further a dialogue on the challenges and potential for improvement and the role of phase II trials in patients with heart failure, the Food and Drug Administration facilitated a meeting on October 17, 2016, represented by clinicians, researchers, industry members, and regulators. This document summarizes the discussion from this meeting and provides key recommendations for future directions.

Heart Failure is a global epidemic, affecting approximately 5 million adults in the U.S.A. The cornerstone of contemporary pharmacological therapy targets the over activated renin-angiotensin-aldosterone and sympathetic autonomic systems. The 2016 focused pharmacologic update on the current Heart Failure Guidelines introduces the use of two newly approved regimens valsartan/sacubitril and ivabradine. Over the last two decades, guideline directed medical therapy has accomplished significant improvement in survival rates among heart failure patients; however these novel compounds were reported to exert additional mortality and morbidity benefits, in heart failure subpopulations with reduced ejection fraction.