Faculty Bibliography

We performed a network meta-analysis of 11 published randomized clinical trials examining the use of temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices in adults with acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock, including 1,053 total patients with an observed in-hospital or 30-day mortality of 40.4%. None of the temporary MCS devices was associated with lower in-hospital or 30-day mortality compared with initial medical therapy or any other MCS device, either individually or in combination. These data do not support the routine use of temporary MCS devices for the purpose of reducing short-term mortality in unselected patients with acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock.

BACKGROUND:The optimal treatment strategy of patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) (especially those with intermediate risk) continues to evolve and remains controversial. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:This study sought to compare the efficacy and safety of anticoagulation (AC) alone, catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT), and systemic thrombolysis (ST) in patients with acute PE. METHODS:PubMed and EMBASE were searched for randomized controlled trials or observational studies which compared outcomes of AC alone, CDT, and ST in acute PE. Efficacy outcome was all-cause mortality. Safety outcomes were major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). RESULTS:We identified 45 studies (17 randomized controlled trials, 2 prospective nonrandomized trials, and 26 retrospective observational trials), which included 81,705 patients. When compared with AC alone, CDT had lower mortality (OR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.39-0.80) but higher major bleeding (OR: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.10-3.08) and numerically higher ICH (OR: 1.51; 95% CI: 0.75-3.04). ST was associated with no difference in mortality but higher major bleeding (OR: 2.16; 95% CI: 1.38-3.38) and ICH (OR: 2.26; 95% CI: 1.14-4.48) when compared with AC alone. The risk of mortality (OR: 2.05; 95% CI: 1.46-2.89) and ICH (OR: 1.50; 95% CI: 1.13-1.99) was higher with ST when compared with CDT. Findings were similar when analysis was restricted to trials of intermediate risk PE. CONCLUSIONS:In patients with acute PE, when compared with AC alone, CDT was associated with a lower mortality but higher risk of bleeding. Moreover, CDT had an enhanced safety profile when compared with ST.

AIMS/OBJECTIVE:Invasive haemodynamic assessment with a pulmonary artery catheter is often used to guide the management of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) and may provide important prognostic information. We aimed to assess prognostic associations and relationships to end-organ dysfunction of presenting haemodynamic parameters in CS. METHODS AND RESULTS/RESULTS:The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network is an investigator-initiated multicenter registry of cardiac intensive care units (CICUs) in North America coordinated by the TIMI Study Group. Patients with CS (2018-2022) who underwent invasive haemodynamic assessment within 24 h of CICU admission were included. Associations of haemodynamic parameters with in-hospital mortality were assessed using logistic regression, and associations with presenting serum lactate were assessed using least squares means regression. Sensitivity analyses were performed excluding patients on temporary mechanical circulatory support and adjusted for vasoactive-inotropic score. Among the 3603 admissions with CS, 1473 had haemodynamic data collected within 24 h of CICU admission. The median cardiac index was 1.9 (25th-75th percentile, 1.6-2.4) L/min/m2 and mean arterial pressure (MAP) was 74 (66-86) mmHg. Parameters associated with mortality included low MAP, low systolic blood pressure, low systemic vascular resistance, elevated right atrial pressure (RAP), elevated RAP/pulmonary capillary wedge pressure ratio, and low pulmonary artery pulsatility index. These associations were generally consistent when controlling for the intensity of background pharmacologic and mechanical haemodynamic support. These parameters were also associated with higher presenting serum lactate. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:In a contemporary CS population, presenting haemodynamic parameters reflecting decreased systemic arterial tone and right ventricular dysfunction are associated with adverse outcomes and systemic hypoperfusion.

BACKGROUND:Cardiovascular and critical care professional societies recommend incorporating family engagement practices into routine clinical care. However, little is known about current family engagement practices in contemporary cardiac intensive care units (CICUs). METHODS:We implemented a validated 12-item family engagement practice survey among site investigators participating in the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network, a collaborative network of CICUs in North America. The survey includes 9 items assessing specific engagement practices, 1 item about other family-centered care practices, and 2 open-ended questions on strategies and barriers concerning family engagement practice. We developed an engagement practice score by assigning 1 point for each family engagement practice partially or fully adopted at each site (max score 9). We assessed for relationships between the engagement practice score and CICU demographics. RESULTS:All sites (N=39; 100%) completed the survey. The most common family engagement practices were open visitation (95%), information and support to families (85%), structured care conferences (n=82%), and family participation in rounds (77%). The median engagement practice score was 5 (interquartile range, 4). There were no differences in engagement practice scores by geographic region or CICU type. The most commonly used strategies to promote family engagement were family presence during rounds (41%), communication (28%), and family meetings (28%). The most common barriers to family engagement were COVID-related visitation policies (38%) and resource limitations (13%). CONCLUSIONS:Family engagement practices are routinely performed in many CICUs; however, considerable variability exists. There is a need for strategies to address the variability of family engagement practices in CICUs.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW:There is emerging evidence on the role of the multimodality imaging in the setting of cardiogenic shock. The utility of different imaging modalities, along with their pitfalls and limitations, and their integration in a multiparametric approach are discussed in the current review. RECENT FINDINGS:The evaluation of congestion and perfusion in patients with shock has allowed a better understanding of the underlying physiopathological mechanisms. Integration of echocardiography, using more physiological parameters, with lung ultrasound, as well as the Doppler evaluation of abdominal blood flow dynamics, has led to a better stratification in patinas with hemodynamic instability. SUMMARY:Although validation of the integrated approaches and single parameters are needed, the physiopathological-driven approach using ultrasound in patients with cardiogenic shock on top of the clinical and biochemical evaluation, may aid to a quicker and more detailed evaluation of patient's phenotype.

BACKGROUND:The appropriate use of pulmonary artery catheters (PACs) in critically ill cardiac patients remains debated. OBJECTIVES:The authors aimed to characterize the current use of PACs in cardiac intensive care units (CICUs) with attention to patient-level and institutional factors influencing their application and explore the association with in-hospital mortality. METHODS:The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network is a multicenter network of CICUs in North America. Between 2017 and 2021, participating centers contributed annual 2-month snapshots of consecutive CICU admissions. Admission diagnoses, clinical and demographic data, use of PACs, and in-hospital mortality were captured. RESULTS:Among 13,618 admissions at 34 sites, 3,827 were diagnosed with shock, with 2,583 of cardiogenic etiology. The use of mechanical circulatory support and heart failure were the patient-level factors most strongly associated with a greater likelihood of the use of a PAC (OR: 5.99 [95% CI: 5.15-6.98]; P < 0.001 and OR: 3.33 [95% CI: 2.91-3.81]; P < 0.001, respectively). The proportion of shock admissions with a PAC varied significantly by study center ranging from 8% to 73%. In analyses adjusted for factors associated with their placement, PAC use was associated with lower mortality in all shock patients admitted to a CICU (OR: 0.79 [95% CI: 0.66-0.96]; P = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS:There is wide variation in the use of PACs that is not fully explained by patient level-factors and appears driven in part by institutional tendency. PAC use was associated with higher survival in cardiac patients with shock presenting to CICUs. Randomized trials are needed to guide the appropriate use of PACs in cardiac critical care.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:A lack of explainability in published machine learning (ML) models limits clinicians' understanding of how predictions are made, in turn undermining uptake of the models into clinical practice. OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:The purpose of this study was to develop explainable ML models to predict in-hospital mortality in patients hospitalized for myocardial infarction (MI). METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Adult patients hospitalized for an MI were identified in the National Inpatient Sample between January 1, 2012, and September 30, 2015. The resulting cohort comprised 457,096 patients described by 64 predictor variables relating to demographic/comorbidity characteristics and in-hospital complications. The gradient boosting algorithm eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) was used to develop explainable models for in-hospital mortality prediction in the overall cohort and patient subgroups based on MI type and/or sex. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:The resulting models exhibited an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) ranging from 0.876 to 0.942, specificity 82% to 87%, and sensitivity 75% to 87%. All models exhibited high negative predictive value ≥0.974. The SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) framework was applied to explain the models. The top predictor variables of increasing and decreasing mortality were age and undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, respectively. Other notable findings included a decreased mortality risk associated with certain patient subpopulations with hyperlipidemia and a comparatively greater risk of death among women below age 55 years. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:The literature lacks explainable ML models predicting in-hospital mortality after an MI. In a national registry, explainable ML models performed best in ruling out in-hospital death post-MI, and their explanation illustrated their potential for guiding hypothesis generation and future study design.

BACKGROUND:In patients with tricuspid valve infective endocarditis, percutaneous debulking is a treatment option. However, the outcomes of this approach are less well known. METHODS:We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent percutaneous vegetation debulking for tricuspid valve infective endocarditis from August 2020 to November 2022 at a large academic tertiary care public hospital. The primary efficacy outcome was procedural success defined by clearance of blood cultures. The primary safety outcome was any procedural complication. For the composite outcome of in-hospital mortality or heart block, outcomes were compared (sequential noninferiority and superiority) with published surgical outcomes data. RESULTS:=0.016). CONCLUSIONS:Percutaneous debulking is feasible, effective, and safe in treating patients with tricuspid valve infective endocarditis refractory to medical therapy.

BACKGROUND:Mortality remains high in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS), and early reperfusion has been shown to improve outcomes. We analyzed the association between first medical contact (FMC)-to-percutaneous coronary angiography time with mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events among patients with STEMI with and without CS. METHODS:We performed a retrospective analysis of the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority STEMI registry, including all patients with STEMI who received primary percutaneous coronary angiography between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2020, and stratified them by presence or absence of CS at hospital arrival. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, the secondary outcome was in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as a composite of the first occurrence of mortality, cardiac arrest, heart failure, intracerebral hemorrhage, cerebrovascular accident, or reinfarction. Mixed effects logistic regression with restricted cubic splines was used to estimate the relationships between FMC-to-device time and the outcomes in the CS and non-CS groups. RESULTS:<0.001). Between 60 and 90 minutes, for each 10-minute increase in FMC-to-device time, absolute mortality for patients with CS increased by 4% to 7%, whereas for patients without CS, it increased by <0.5%. CONCLUSIONS:Among patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary angiography, reperfusion delays among patients with CS are associated with significantly worse outcomes. Strategies to reduce FMC-to-device times for patients with STEMI presenting with CS are required.