Faculty Bibliography

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:ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches) did not find an overall reduction in cardiovascular events with an initial invasive versus conservative management strategy in chronic coronary disease; however, there were conservative strategy participants who underwent invasive coronary angiography early postrandomization (within 6 months). Identifying factors associated with angiography in conservative strategy participants will inform clinical decision-making in patients with chronic coronary disease. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Factors independently associated with angiography performed within 6 months of randomization were identified using Fine and Gray proportional subdistribution hazard models, including demographics, region of randomization, medical history, risk factor control, symptoms, ischemia severity, coronary anatomy based on protocol-mandated coronary computed tomography angiography, and medication use. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Among 2591 conservative strategy participants, angiography within 6 months of randomization occurred in 8.7% (4.7% for a suspected primary end point event, 1.6% for persistent symptoms, and 2.6% due to protocol nonadherence) and was associated with the following baseline characteristics: enrollment in Europe versus Asia (hazard ratio [HR], 1.81 [95% CI, 1.14-2.86]), daily and weekly versus no angina (HR, 5.97 [95% CI, 2.78-12.86] and 2.63 [95% CI, 1.51-4.58], respectively), poor to fair versus good to excellent health status (HR, 2.02 [95% CI, 1.23-3.32]) assessed with Seattle Angina Questionnaire, and new/more frequent angina prerandomization (HR, 1.80 [95% CI, 1.34-2.40]). Baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <70 mg/dL was associated with a lower risk of angiography (HR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.46-0.91) but not baseline ischemia severity nor the presence of multivessel or proximal left anterior descending artery stenosis >70% on coronary computed tomography angiography. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Among ISCHEMIA participants randomized to the conservative strategy, angiography within 6 months of randomization was performed in <10% of patients. It was associated with frequent or increasing baseline angina and poor quality of life but not with objective markers of disease severity. Well-controlled baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was associated with a reduced likelihood of angiography. These findings point to the importance of a comprehensive assessment of symptoms and a review of guideline-directed medical therapy goals when deciding the initial treatment strategy for chronic coronary disease. REGISTRATION/UNASSIGNED:URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01471522.

BACKGROUND:The ISCHEMIA trial found that patients with chronic coronary disease randomized to invasive strategy had better health status than those randomized to conservative strategy. It is unclear how best to translate these population-level results to individual patients. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The authors sought to identify patient characteristics associated with health status from invasive and conservative strategies, and develop a prediction algorithm for shared decision-making. METHODS:One-year disease-specific health status was assessed in ISCHEMIA with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) Summary Score (SAQ SS) and Angina Frequency, Physical Limitations (PL), and Quality of Life (QL) domains (range 0-100, higher = less angina/better health status). RESULTS:Among 4,617 patients from 320 sites in 37 countries, mean SAQ SS was 74.1 ± 18.9 at baseline and 85.7 ± 15.6 at 1 year. Lower baseline SAQ SS and younger age were associated with better 1-year health status with invasive strategy (P interaction = 0.009 and P interaction = 0.004, respectively). For the individual domains, there were significant treatment interactions for baseline SAQ score (Angina Frequency, PL), age (PL, QL), anterior ischemia (PL), and number of baseline antianginal medications (QL), with more benefit of invasive in patients with worse baseline health status, younger age, anterior ischemia, and on more antianginal medications. Parsimonious prediction models were developed for 1-year SAQ domains with invasive or conservative strategies to support shared decision-making. CONCLUSIONS:In the management of chronic coronary disease, individual patient characteristics are associated with 1-year health status, with younger age and poorer angina-related health status showing greater benefit from invasive management. This prediction algorithm can support the translation of the ISCHEMIA trial results to individual patients. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches [ISCHEMIA]; NCT01471522).

BACKGROUND:Therapeutic-dose heparin decreased days requiring organ support in non-critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19 but its impact on persistent symptoms or quality of life (QoL) is unclear. RESEARCH QUESTION/OBJECTIVE:In the ACTIV-4a trial, was randomization of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 illness to therapeutic-dose vs. prophylactic heparin associated with less symptoms and better QoL at 90-days? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS/METHODS:This was an open-label randomized controlled trial at 34 hospitals in the US and Spain. 727 non-critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19 from September 2020 to June 2021 were randomized to therapeutic-dose vs. prophylactic heparin. Only patients with 90-day data on symptoms and QoL were analyzed. We ascertained symptoms and QoL by EQ-5D-5L at 90-day follow-up in a pre-planned analysis for the ACTIV-4a trial. Individual domains assessed by the EQ-5D-5L were mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed. RESULTS:Among 571 patients, 288 (50.4%) reported at least one symptom. In 410 patients, 148 (36.1%) reported moderate to severe impairment in one or more domains of EQ-5D-5L. Presence of 90-day symptoms were associated with moderate-severe impairment in the EQ-5D-5L domains of mobility (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.37, 95% CI 1.22-4.59), usual activity (aOR 3.66, 95% CI 1.75-7.65), pain (aOR 2.43, 95% CI 1.43-4.12), and anxiety (aOR 4.32, 95% CI 2.06-9.02), compared to patients reporting no symptoms There were no differences in symptoms or the overall EQ-5D-5L index score between treatment groups. Therapeutic-dose heparin was associated with less moderate-severe impairment in all physical functioning domains (mobility, self-care, usual activities) but was independently significant only in the self-care domain (aOR 0.32, CI 0.11-0.96). INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS:In a randomized controlled trial of hospitalized non-critically ill patients with COVID-19, therapeutic-dose heparin was associated with less severe impairment in the self-care domain of EQ-5D-5L. However, this type of impairment was uncommon, affecting 23 individuals. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:NCT04505774.

BACKGROUND:Women with chronic coronary disease are generally older than men and have more comorbidities but less atherosclerosis. We explored sex differences in revascularization, guideline-directed medical therapy, and outcomes among patients with chronic coronary disease with ischemia on stress testing, with and without invasive management. METHODS AND RESULTS/RESULTS:=0.49), with no significant sex-by-treatment-group interactions. CONCLUSIONS:Women had less extensive coronary artery disease and, therefore, lower revascularization rates in the invasive group. Despite lower risk factor goal attainment, women with chronic coronary disease experienced similar risk-adjusted outcomes to men in the ISCHEMIA trial. REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:URL: http://wwwclinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01471522.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Clinical trials suggest that therapeutic-dose heparin may prevent critical illness and vascular complications due to COVID-19, but knowledge gaps exist regarding the efficacy of therapeutic heparin including its comparative effect relative to intermediate-dose anticoagulation. OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:The authors performed 2 complementary secondary analyses of a completed randomized clinical trial: 1) a prespecified per-protocol analysis; and 2) an exploratory dose-based analysis to compare the effect of therapeutic-dose heparin with low- and intermediate-dose heparin. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Patients who received initial anticoagulation dosed consistently with randomization were included. The primary outcome was organ support-free days (OSFDs), a combination of in-hospital death and days free of organ support through day 21. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Among 2,860 participants, 1,761 (92.8%) noncritically ill and 857 (89.1%) critically ill patients were treated per-protocol. Among noncritically ill per-protocol patients, the posterior probability that therapeutic-dose heparin improved OSFDs as compared with usual care was 99.3% (median adjusted OR: 1.36; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 1.07-1.74). Therapeutic heparin had a high posterior probability of efficacy relative to both low- (94.6%; adjusted OR: 1.26; 95% CrI: 0.95-1.64) and intermediate- (99.8%; adjusted OR: 1.80; 95% CrI: 1.22-2.62) dose thromboprophylaxis. Among critically ill per-protocol patients, the posterior probability that therapeutic heparin improved outcomes was low. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Among noncritically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19 who were randomized to and initially received therapeutic-dose anticoagulation, heparin, compared with usual care, was associated with improved OSFDs, a combination of in-hospital death and days free of organ support. Therapeutic heparin appeared superior to both low- and intermediate-dose thromboprophylaxis.

OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to assess whether an obesity paradox (lower event rates with higher body mass index [BMI]) exists in participants with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) and chronic coronary disease in the International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness of Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA)-CKD, and whether BMI modified the effect of initial treatment strategy. METHODS:). Associations between BMI and the primary outcome of all-cause death or myocardial infarction (D/MI), and all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and MI individually were estimated. Associations with health status were also evaluated using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire-7, the Rose Dyspnea Scale, and the EuroQol-5D Visual Analog Scale. RESULTS:was marginally associated with D/MI (HR 1.43 [1.00-2.04]) and greater dyspnea throughout follow-up (P < .05 at all time points). Heterogeneity of treatment effect between baseline BMI was not evident for any outcome. CONCLUSIONS:In the ISCHEMIA-CKD trial, an obesity paradox was not detected. Higher BMI was associated with worse dyspnea, and a trend toward increased D/MI and MI risk. Larger studies to validate these findings are warranted.

BACKGROUND:Global longitudinal strain (GLS) is a sensitive marker for identifying subclinical myocardial dysfunction in obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Little is known about the relationship between GLS and ischemia in patients with myocardial ischemia and no obstructive CAD (INOCA). OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To investigate the relationship between resting GLS and ischemia on stress echocardiography (SE) in patients with INOCA. METHODS:Left ventricular GLS was calculated offline on resting SE images at enrollment (n = 144) and 1-year follow-up (n = 120) in the CIAO-ISCHEMIA (Changes in Ischemia and Angina over One year in International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches trial screen failures with no obstructive CAD on computed tomography [CT] angiography) study, which enrolled participants with moderate or severe ischemia by local SE interpretation (≥3 segments with new or worsening wall motion abnormality and no obstructive (<50% stenosis) on coronary computed tomography angiography. RESULTS:Global longitudinal strain values were normal in 83.3% at enrollment and 94.2% at follow-up. Global longitudinal strain values were not associated with a positive SE at enrollment (GLS = -21.5% positive SE vs GLS = -19.9% negative SE, P = .443) or follow-up (GLS = -23.2% positive SE vs GLS = -23.1% negative SE, P = .859). Significant change in GLS was not associated with positive SE in follow-up (P = .401). Regional strain was not associated with colocalizing ischemia at enrollment or follow-up. Changes in GLS and number of ischemic segments from enrollment to follow-up showed a modest but not clinically meaningful correlation (β = 0.41; 95% CI, 0.16, 0.67; P = .002). CONCLUSIONS:In this cohort of INOCA patients, resting GLS values were largely normal and did not associate with the presence, severity, or location of stress-induced ischemia. These findings may suggest the absence of subclinical myocardial dysfunction detectable by echocardiographic strain analysis at rest in INOCA.