Faculty Bibliography

IMPORTANCE:The evolution of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has led to improved safety and efficacy, such that overnight observation can be avoided in some patients. We sought to provide a narrative review of the current literature regarding the outcomes of same-day discharge (SDD) PCI and to describe a framework for the development of an SDD program. OBSERVATIONS:A literature search of PubMed was performed for human studies on SDD PCI published in English from January 1, 1995, to July 31, 2015. We reviewed the studies between June and September 2015. After literature review, we included reports of randomized clinical trials, observational studies, meta-analyses guidelines, and consensus statements in a narrative review. Compared with overnight observation, there was no increase in adverse events (bleeding, repeat coronary procedures, death, or rehospitalization) among patients in these studies who were discharged on the same day of their PCI procedure. Same-day discharge was associated with significant cost savings and was preferred by patients. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:The available evidence supports the safety of SDD in selected patients after PCI. Specific programmatic features are important to the successful implementation of SDD after PCI. Greater adoption of SDD programs after PCI has the potential to improve patient satisfaction, increase bed availability, and reduce hospital costs without increasing adverse patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to explore whether the use of bleeding avoidance strategies (BAS) explains variability in hospital-level bleeding following percutaneous coronary intervention. BACKGROUND:Prior studies have reported that bleeding rates following percutaneous coronary intervention vary markedly among hospitals, but the extent to which use of BAS explains this variation is unknown. METHODS:Using the American College of Cardiology National Cardiovascular Data Registry's CathPCI Registry, estimated hospital-level bleeding rates from 2,459,686 procedures at 1,358 sites were determined. A series of models were fit to estimate random-effect variance, adjusting for patient risk (using the validated CathPCI bleeding risk model, C statistic = 0.77) and various combinations of BAS (transradial access, bivalirudin, vascular closure device use). The rate of any BAS use was also estimated for each hospital, and the association between percentage BAS use and predicted bleeding rates was determined. RESULTS:In total, 125,361 bleeding events (5.1%) were observed; patients experiencing bleeding events had lower rates of radial access (5.0% vs. 11.2%; p < 0.001), bivalirudin therapy (43.8% vs. 59.4%), and vascular closure device use (32.9% vs. 42.4%, p < 0.001) than those without bleeding. There was significant variation in bleeding rates across hospitals (median 5.0%; interquartile range [IQR]: 2.7% to 6.6%), which persisted after incorporating patient-level risk (median 5.1%; IQR: 4.0% to 4.4%). Patient factors accounted for 20% of the overall hospital-level variation, and radial access plus bivalirudin use accounted for an additional 7.8% of the overall hospital-level variation. The median hospital rate of any BAS use was 86.6% (IQR: 72.5% to 94.1%). A significant decrease in observed hospital-level bleeding was seen in hospitals above the median in BAS use (adjusted odds ratio: 0.90; 95% confidence interval: 0.88 to 0.93). CONCLUSIONS:A modest proportion of the variation in hospitals' rates of bleeding following percutaneous coronary intervention is attributable to differential use of BAS. Further analyses are required to determine the remaining approximately 70% causes of variation in percutaneous coronary intervention bleeding seen among hospitals.

Bivalirudin is an alternative to unfractionated heparin (UFH) anticoagulation during percutaneous coronary intervention. Previously, we have reported clinical benefit on major bleeding in favor of bivalirudin compared with UFH monotherapy but inconclusive results on mortality. Controversial data have been reported in the last 2 years. We conducted an updated meta-analysis including randomized trials and observational studies, which evaluated ischemic and bleeding outcomes for bivalirudin compared with UFH-only during percutaneous coronary intervention. We included 18 observational studies and 12 randomized trials published from 2003 to 2015. Primary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events within 30 days including death, myocardial infarction, and urgent revascularization and stent thrombosis, major bleeding, and transfusion. Overall, we found a significant risk reduction with bivalirudin for major bleeding (odds ratio [OR] 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49 to 0.71, p <0.0001) and for transfusion (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.95, p = 0.01) and similar risk for major adverse cardiovascular events (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.12, p = 0.80). However, there was a substantial increased risk of stent thrombosis associated with bivalirudin (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.08, p = 0.009). No impact on mortality was found. Meta-regression analyses on major bleeding suggested that bivalirudin was more effective than UFH at doses >60 IU/kg and independent of radial access. In conclusion, compared with UFH monotherapy, bivalirudin remains associated with less bleeding risk but higher stent thrombosis risk. Further study remains required to define its role in current antithrombotic armamentarium.

Platelets play a key role in mediating stent thrombosis, which is the major cause of ischemic events immediately after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Antiplatelet therapy is therefore the cornerstone of antithrombotic therapy after PCI. However, the use of antiplatelet agents increases bleeding risk, with more potent antiplatelet agents further increasing bleeding risk. In the past 5 years, potent and fast-acting ^P2Y12 inhibitors have augmented the antiplatelet armamentarium available to interventional cardiologists. This article reviews the preclinical and clinical data surrounding these new agents, and discusses the significant questions and controversies that still exist regarding the optimal antiplatelet strategy.

BACKGROUND:Because of recent changes in criteria for coverage for inpatient hospital stays, most nonacute percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures are reimbursed on an outpatient basis regardless of underlying patient risk. Downstream effects of these changes on the risk profile of patients undergoing outpatient PCI have not been evaluated. METHODS AND RESULTS/RESULTS:Using the American College of Cardiology National Cardiovascular Data Registry's CathPCI Registry, we assessed temporal trends in risk profiles and rates of hospital admission among 999 279 patients undergoing PCI qualifying for outpatient reimbursement. We estimated mortality and bleeding risk using validated models from the registry. From 2009 to 2014, the proportion of outpatients not admitted to a hospital after PCI increased from 32.8% to 66.3% (P<0.001). Patients who were admitted after PCI were older, had greater comorbidities, and experienced more post-PCI complications (all P<0.001). Among those not admitted, the proportion of patients at high risk for predicted mortality increased significantly from 17.0% to 19.8% during the study period (P<0.001). In contrast, 16.7% of patients admitted after PCI were at low risk for mortality. CONCLUSIONS:Among patients undergoing PCI procedures that qualify for outpatient reimbursement, there has been a temporal decrease in postprocedure hospital admission. Concomitantly, the proportion of these outpatients at high risk for mortality has significantly increased over time. These data suggest that current reimbursement classification could be improved by incorporating patient risk to appropriately match the necessary resources to the needed level of care.

BACKGROUND:Older adults presenting with acute myocardial infarction (MI) often have multivessel coronary artery disease amenable to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), yet the risks of multivessel intervention may outweigh potential benefits in these patients. We sought to determine if nonculprit intervention during the index PCI is associated with better outcomes among older patients with acute MI and multivessel disease. METHODS:We examined 19,271 ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI) and 31,361 non-STEMI (NSTEMI) patients 65years or older with multivessel disease in a linked CathPCI Registry-Medicare database, excluding patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting, left main disease, or cardiogenic shock. Using inverse probability-weighted propensity adjustment, we compared mortality between patients receiving culprit-only vs multivessel intervention during the index PCI procedure. RESULTS:Most older MI patients (91% STEMI and 74% NSTEMI) received culprit-only intervention during the index PCI. Among STEMI patients, multivessel intervention during the index PCI was associated with higher 30-day mortality (8.3% vs 6.3%, adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.36, 95% CI 1.14-1.62) than culprit-only intervention, and this trend persisted at 1year (13.8% vs 12.2%, adjusted HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.99-1.31). No significant mortality differences were observed among NSTEMI patients at 30days (3.4% vs 4.1%, adjusted HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.88-1.15) or at 1year (10.1% vs 10.8%, adjusted HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.91-1.08). CONCLUSIONS:Nonculprit intervention during the index PCI was associated with worse outcomes among STEMI patients, but not NSTEMI patients.

Public reporting of health care data continues to proliferate as consumers and other stakeholders seek information on the quality and outcomes of care. Medicare's Hospital Compare website, the U.S. News & World Report hospital rankings, and several state-level programs are well known. Many rely heavily on administrative data as a surrogate to reflect clinical reality. Clinical data are traditionally more difficult and costly to collect, but more accurately reflect patients' clinical status, thus enhancing the validity of quality metrics. We describe the public reporting effort being launched by the American College of Cardiology and partnering professional organizations using clinical data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) programs. This hospital-level voluntary effort will initially report process of care measures from the percutaneous coronary intervention (CathPCI) and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) registries of the NCDR. Over time, additional process, outcomes, and composite performance metrics will be reported.

BACKGROUND:Two large trials have reported contradictory results at 1 year after thrombus aspiration in ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). In a 1-year follow-up of the largest randomised trial of thrombus aspiration, we aimed to clarify the longer-term benefits, to help guide clinical practice. METHODS:The trial of routine aspiration ThrOmbecTomy with PCI versus PCI ALone in Patients with STEMI (TOTAL) was a prospective, randomised, investigator-initiated trial of routine manual thrombectomy versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) alone in 10,732 patients with STEMI. Eligible adult patients (aged ≥18 years) from 87 hospitals in 20 countries were enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1) within 12 h of symptom onset to receive routine manual thrombectomy with PCI or PCI alone. Permuted block randomisation (with variable block size) was done by a 24 h computerised central system, and was stratified by centre. Participants and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. The trial did not show a difference at 180 days in the primary outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or heart failure. However, the results showed improvements in the surrogate outcomes of ST segment resolution and distal embolisation, but whether or not this finding would translate into a longer term benefit remained unclear. In this longer-term follow-up of the TOTAL study, we report the results on the primary outcome (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or heart failure) and secondary outcomes at 1 year. Analyses of the primary outcome were by modified intention to treat and only included patients who underwent index PCI. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01149044. FINDINGS/RESULTS:Between Aug 5, 2010, and July 25, 2014, 10,732 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to thrombectomy followed by PCI (n=5372) or to PCI alone (n=5360). After exclusions of patients who did not undergo PCI in each group (337 in the PCI and thrombectomy group and 331 in the PCI alone group), the final study population comprised 10,064 patients (5035 thrombectomy and 5029 PCI alone). The primary outcome at 1 year occurred in 395 (8%) of 5035 patients in the thrombectomy group compared with 394 (8%) of 5029 in the PCI alone group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·00 [95% CI 0·87-1·15], p=0·99). Cardiovascular death within 1 year occurred in 179 (4%) of the thrombectomy group and in 192 (4%) of 5029 in the PCI alone group (HR 0·93 [95% CI 0·76-1·14], p=0·48). The key safety outcome, stroke within 1 year, occurred in 60 patients (1·2%) in the thrombectomy group compared with 36 (0·7%) in the PCI alone group (HR 1·66 [95% CI 1·10-2·51], p=0·015). INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS:Routine thrombus aspiration during PCI for STEMI did not reduce longer-term clinical outcomes and might be associated with an increase in stroke. As a result, thrombus aspiration can no longer be recommended as a routine strategy in STEMI. FUNDING/BACKGROUND:Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Canadian Network and Centre for Trials Internationally, and Medtronic Inc.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the safety of drug-eluting stents (DES) when treating patients with failing saphenous vein grafts (SVG). BACKGROUND:DES reduce target vessel revascularization in patients with failing SVGs; however, compared with bare metal stents (BMS), DES have been variably associated with increased mortality. METHODS:Clinical records from National Cardiovascular Data Registry(®) CathPCI Registry(®) (49,325 older individuals [≥65 years] who underwent SVG stenting 2005-2009) were linked to Medicare claims to create a longitudinal record. Death, myocardial infarction (MI), and urgent revascularization with DES versus BMS were evaluated to 3 years using propensity matching (PM). Results were stratified by clinical presentation (acute coronary syndrome [ACS], non-ACS), previous lesion treatment (in-stent, de novo), and graft segment (aortic, body, distal anastomosis). RESULTS:In this older cohort (median age, 75 years), acute presentations were prevalent (ACS, 69%; TIMI flow <3, 45%), and adverse clinical outcomes were common by 3 years (death, 24.5%; MI, 14.6%; urgent revascularization, 29.5%). Among DES patients (n = 31,403), 3-year mortality was lower (vs. BMS) (22.7% vs. 28.0%, P < 0.001; PM hazard ratio [HR] 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.83-0.91), and no difference was observed in the adjusted risk for MI (PM HR 0.97, 0.91 to 1.03) or urgent revascularization (PM HR 1.04, 0.99-1.08). These findings were independent of clinical presentation, previous lesion treatment, and graft segment (P interaction, ns). CONCLUSIONS:In this large SVG PCI cohort, all-cause mortality was lower among those receiving DES, and no difference in MI or urgent revascularization was observed to 3 years. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.