Faculty Bibliography

IMPORTANCE/OBJECTIVE:Bleeding is the most common complication after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and is associated with increased morbidity and health care costs. The incidence of bleeding-related mortality after PCI has not been described in a nationally representative population. Furthermore, the relationships among bleeding risk, bleeding site, and mortality are unclear. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To describe the association between bleeding events and in-hospital mortality after PCI and to estimate the adjusted population attributable risk (estimated as the proportion of mortality risk associated with bleeding events), risk difference, and number needed to harm (NNH) for bleeding-related in-hospital mortality after PCI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS/METHODS:Data from 3,386,688 procedures in the CathPCI Registry performed in the United States between 2004 and 2011 were analyzed. The population attributable risk was calculated after adjustment for baseline demographic, clinical, and procedural variables. To calculate the NNH for bleeding-related mortality, a propensity-matched analysis was performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES/METHODS:In-hospital mortality. RESULTS:There were 57,246 bleeding events (1.7%) and 22,165 in-hospital deaths (0.65%) in 3,386,688 PCI procedures. The adjusted population attributable risk for mortality related to major bleeding was 12.1% (95% CI, 11.4%-12.7%) in the entire CathPCI cohort. The propensity-matched population consisted of 56,078 procedures with a major bleeding event and 224 312 controls. In this matched cohort, major bleeding was associated with increased in-hospital mortality (5.26% vs 1.87%; risk difference, 3.39% [95% CI, 3.20%-3.59%]; NNH = 29 [95% CI, 28-31]; P < .001). The association between major bleeding and in-hospital mortality was observed in all strata of preprocedural bleeding risk (low: 1.62% vs 0.17%; risk difference, 1.45% [95% CI, 1.13%-1.77%], NNH = 69 [95% CI, 57-88], P < .001; intermediate: 3.27% vs 0.71%; risk difference, 2.56% [95% CI, 2.33%-2.79%], NNH = 39 [95% CI, 36-43], P < .001; and high: 8.16% vs 3.45%; risk difference, 4.71% [95% CI, 4.35%-5.07%], NNH = 21 [95% CI, 20-23], P < .001). Although both access-site and non-access-site bleeding were associated with increased in-hospital mortality (2.73% vs 1.87%; risk difference, 0.86% [95% CI, 0.66%-1.05%], NNH = 117 [95% CI, 95-151], P < .001; and 8.25% vs 1.87%; risk difference, 6.39% [95% CI, 6.04%-6.73%], NNH = 16 [95% CI, 15-17], P < .001, respectively), the NNH was lower for nonaccess bleeding. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE/CONCLUSIONS:In a large registry of patients undergoing PCI, postprocedural bleeding events were associated with increased risk of in-hospital mortality, with an estimated 12.1% of deaths related to bleeding complications.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The authors sought to compare the radiation dose between radial and femoral access. BACKGROUND:Small trials have shown an increase in the radiation dose with radial compared with femoral access, but many were performed during the operators' learning curve of radial access. METHODS:Patients were randomized to radial or femoral access, as a part of the RIVAL (RadIal Vs. femorAL) trial (N = 7,021). Fluoroscopy time was prospectively collected in 5740 patients and radiation dose quantified as air kerma in 1,445 patients and dose-area product (DAP) in 2,255 patients. RESULTS:Median fluoroscopy time was higher with radial versus femoral access (9.3 vs. 8.0 min, p < 0.001). Median air kerma was nominally higher with radial versus femoral access (1,046 vs. 930 mGy, respectively, p = 0.051). Median DAP was not different between radial and femoral access (52.8 Gy-cm(2) vs. 51.2 Gy·cm(2), p = 0.83). When results are stratified according to procedural volume, air kerma was increased only in the lowest tertile of radial volume centers (low 1,425 vs. 1,045 mGy, p = 0.002; middle 987 vs. 958 mGy, p = 0.597; high 652 vs. 621 mGy, p = 0.403, interaction p = 0.026). Multivariable regression showed procedural volume was the greatest independent predictor of lower air kerma dose (ratio of geometric means 0.55; 95% confidence interval 0.49 to 0.61 for highest-volume radial centers). CONCLUSIONS:Radiation dose as measured by air kerma was nominally higher with radial versus femoral access, but differences were present only in lower-volume centers and operators. High-volume centers have the lowest radiation dose irrespective of which access site approach that they use. (A Trial of Trans-radial Versus Trans-femoral Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) Access Site Approach in Patients With Unstable Angina or Myocardial Infarction Managed With an Invasive Strategy [RIVAL]; NCT01014273).

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:This study sought to compared the use and effectiveness of bleeding avoidance strategies (BAS) by sex. BACKGROUND:Women have higher rates of bleeding following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS:Among 570,777 men (67.5%) and women (32.5%) who underwent PCI in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry's CathPCI Registry between July 1, 2009 and March 31, 2011, in-hospital bleeding rates and the use of BAS (vascular closure devices, bivalirudin, radial approach, and their combinations) were assessed. The relative risk of bleeding for each BAS compared with no BAS was determined in women and men using multivariable logistic regressions adjusted for clinical characteristics and the propensity for receiving BAS. Finally, the absolute risk differences in bleeding associated with BAS were compared. RESULTS:Overall, the use of any BAS differed slightly between women and men (75.4% vs. 75.7%, p = 0.01). When BAS was not used, women had significantly higher rates of bleeding than men (12.5% vs. 6.2%, p < 0.01). Both sexes had similar adjusted risk reductions of bleeding when any BAS was used (women, odds ratio: 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.57 to 0.63; men, odds ratio: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.59 to 0.65). Women and men had lower absolute bleeding risks with BAS; however, these absolute risk differences were greater in women (6.3% vs. 3.2%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS:Women continue to have almost twice the rate of bleeding following PCI. The use of any BAS was associated with a similarly lower risk of bleeding for men and women; however, the absolute risk differences were substantially higher in women. These data underscore the importance of applying effective strategies to limit post-PCI bleeding, especially in women.

BACKGROUND:Bleeding is a major limitation of antithrombotic therapy among invasively managed non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS) patients; therefore, we examined the use of radial access and its association with outcomes among NSTE-ACS patients. METHODS:Clinical characteristics and geographic variation in radial access were examined, as well as its association with bleeding, red blood cell transfusion and ischemic outcomes (96-hour death/myocardial infarction/recurrent ischemic/thrombotic bailout; 30-day death/myocardial infarction; 1-year death) in the EARLY versus delayed, provisional eptifibatide in acute coronary syndromes trial. RESULTS:Of 9126 patients, 13.5% underwent radial-access catheterization. Female sex, age, weight, and prior revascularization were inversely associated with radial access, and its use varied widely by country (2%-97%). There were fewer GUSTO severe/moderate bleeds and red blood cell transfusions in the radial access group; however, it was attenuated after adjustment (odds ratio 0.73, 95% confidence intervals [CI] [0.50-1.06], P = .094 and 1.00 [0.71-1.40] P = .991). Ischemic outcomes did not differ by access site. CONCLUSIONS:In this post hoc analysis of a large clinical trial, there was significant international variation in use of radial access for NSTE-ACS patients undergoing invasive management, and it was preferentially used in those at lower risk for bleeding. Radial approach was not associated with a significant reduction in either bleeding or ischemic outcomes. Further study is needed to determine whether wider application of radial approach to acute coronary syndrome patients at high risk for bleeding improves overall outcomes.

With the large number of antithrombotic therapies available and under investigation for the treatment of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE ACS), practice guidelines now stress the importance of selecting an antithrombotic strategy according to the efficacy and safety profiles of the chosen agent. Contemporary trials have incorporated bleeding along with ischemic end points into a composite end point commonly referred to as net clinical benefit, which allows for simultaneous evaluation of the differences between benefit and harm for an investigational antithrombotic therapy. However, incorporating major bleeding into a composite end point that includes ischemic events is not warranted and is associated with many pitfalls. In this article, we discuss the validity of combining efficacy and safety end points to form a net clinical benefit composite end point with the traditional time-to-event analysis for trials evaluating antithrombotic therapies for NSTE ACS. We describe alternative statistical approaches for concurrent assessment of the safety and efficacy of antithrombotic therapies used to treat patients with NSTE ACS.

BACKGROUND:Prior trials suggest it is safe to defer transfusion at hemoglobin levels above 7 to 8 g/dL in most patients. Patients with acute coronary syndrome may benefit from higher hemoglobin levels. METHODS:We performed a pilot trial in 110 patients with acute coronary syndrome or stable angina undergoing cardiac catheterization and a hemoglobin <10 g/dL. Patients in the liberal transfusion strategy received one or more units of blood to raise the hemoglobin level ≥10 g/dL. Patients in the restrictive transfusion strategy were permitted to receive blood for symptoms from anemia or for a hemoglobin <8 g/dL. The predefined primary outcome was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or unscheduled revascularization 30 days post randomization. RESULTS:Baseline characteristics were similar between groups except age (liberal, 67.3; restrictive, 74.3). The mean number of units transfused was 1.6 in the liberal group and 0.6 in the restrictive group. The primary outcome occurred in 6 patients (10.9%) in the liberal group and 14 (25.5%) in the restrictive group (risk difference = 15.0%; 95% confidence interval of difference 0.7% to 29.3%; P = .054 and adjusted for age P = .076). Death at 30 days was less frequent in liberal group (n = 1, 1.8%) compared to restrictive group (n = 7, 13.0%; P = .032). CONCLUSIONS:The liberal transfusion strategy was associated with a trend for fewer major cardiac events and deaths than a more restrictive strategy. These results support the feasibility of and the need for a definitive trial.

BACKGROUND:Radial access for percutaneous coronary intervention (r-PCI) is associated with reduced vascular complications; however, previous reports have shown that <2% of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures in the United States are performed via the radial approach. Our aims were to evaluate temporal trends in r-PCI and compare procedural outcomes between r-PCI and transfemoral PCI. METHODS AND RESULTS/RESULTS:We conducted a retrospective cohort study from the CathPCI registry (n=2 820 874 procedures from 1381 sites) between January 2007 and September 2012. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate the adjusted association between r-PCI and bleeding, vascular complications, and procedural success, using transfemoral PCI as the reference. Outcomes in high-risk subgroups such as age ≥75 years, women, and patients with acute coronary syndrome were also examined. The proportion of r-PCI procedures increased from 1.2% in quarter 1 2007 to 16.1% in quarter 3 2012 and accounted for 6.3% of total procedures from 2007 to 2012 (n=178 643). After multivariable adjustment, r-PCI use in the studied cohort of patients was associated with lower risk of bleeding (adjusted odds ratio, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-0.54) and lower risk of vascular complications (adjusted odds ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.31-0.50) in comparison with transfemoral PCI. The reduction in bleeding and vascular complications was consistent across important subgroups of age, sex, and clinical presentation. CONCLUSIONS:There has been increasing adoption of r-PCI in the United States. Transradial PCI now accounts for 1 of 6 PCIs performed in contemporary clinical practice. In comparison with traditional femoral access, transradial PCI is associated with lower vascular and bleeding complication rates.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:This study sought to determine if there is an association between bleed location and clinical outcomes in acute coronary syndromes (ACS) patients. BACKGROUND:The prognostic significance of bleeding location among ACS patients undergoing cardiac catheterization is not well known. METHODS:We analyzed in-hospital bleeding events among 9,978 patients randomized in the SYNERGY (Superior Yield of the New Strategy of Enoxaparin, Revascularization, and Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors) study. Bleeding events were categorized by location as access site, systemic, surgical, or superficial, and severity was graded using the GUSTO (Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries) definition. We assessed the association of each bleeding location and severity with 6-month risk of death or myocardial infarction using a multicovariate-adjusted Cox proportional hazard model. RESULTS:A total of 4,900 bleeding events were identified among 3,694 ACS patients with in-hospital bleeding. Among 4,679 GUSTO mild/moderate bleeding events, only surgical and systemic bleeds were associated with an increased risk of 6-month death or myocardial infarction (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 2.52 [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.16 to 2.94, and 1.40 [95% CI: 1.16 to 1.69], respectively). Mild/moderate superficial and access-site bleeds were not associated with downstream risk (adjusted HR: 1.17 [95% CI: 0.97 to 1.40], and 0.96 [95% CI: 0.82 to 1.12], respectively). Among 221 GUSTO severe bleeds, surgical bleeds were associated with the highest risk (HR: 5.27 [95% CI: 3.80 to 7.29]), followed by systemic (HR: 4.48 [95% CI: 2.98 to 6.72]), and finally access-site bleeds (HR: 3.57 [95% CI: 2.35 to 5.40]). CONCLUSIONS:Among ACS patients who develop in-hospital bleeding, systemic and surgical bleeding are associated with the highest risks of adverse outcomes regardless of bleeding severity. Although the most frequent among bleeds, GUSTO mild/moderate access-site bleeding is not associated with increased risk. These data underscore the importance of strategies to minimize overall bleeding risk beyond vascular access site management.