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.

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.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW:With the growing prevalence of heart failure, there is a particular need to develop new pharmacologic treatments that can improve outcomes. While there are several approved therapies for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, there is currently no approved agent for those with preserved ejection fraction. The current review aimed to explore the utility of alternate endpoints to mortality and hospitalization. RECENT FINDINGS:There is increased interest in the use of alternative endpoints such as functional status and quality of life for heart failure drug development to focus on patients feeling better in addition to improving outcomes. This should ideally be measured using objective as well as subjective parameters. While mortality and hospitalization remain important endpoints for clinical trials in heart failure, other more patient-centered outcomes are attractive alternatives yet how to best incorporate these in a trial setting remains to be elucidated.