Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Delirium and agitation are common syndromes in critically ill patients. Valproic acid (VPA) has shown benefit in intensive care unit (ICU)-associated delirium and agitation, but further evaluation is needed. OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of VPA for hyperactive delirium and agitation in critically ill adult patients. METHODS:A retrospective cohort study at NYU Langone Health was conducted in critically ill patients treated with VPA for hyperactive delirium or agitation from October 1, 2017 to October 1, 2022. The primary outcome was effectiveness of VPA, defined as a reduction in the total number of any concomitant psychoactive medication by day 3 of VPA treatment. Secondary outcomes included the effect of VPA on the doses of concomitant medications and adverse events. RESULTS: = .047), with benefits noted as early as 48 h after initiation. Adverse events were low in the total cohort (10.3%). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE/CONCLUSIONS:The addition of VPA to a complex pharmacologic regimen for hyperactive delirium and agitation is safe and can assist in the prevention of polypharmacy and overall workload in critically ill patients admitted primarily for cardiogenic shock and respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation.

The clinical effect of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) between antiplatelets and antiretrovirals (ART) on bleeding, thrombosis, and other major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) is unknown. The objective of this retrospective study was to assess the incidence of DDI at P2Y12 inhibitor (P2Y12inh) initiation and the effect of DDI on patient outcomes. Adult people living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLWH; HIV) receiving ART newly initiated on an oral P2Y12inh were included. The primary outcome was the incidence of DDI between ART and P2Y12inh at P2Y12inh initiation. Secondary outcomes included bleeding events, MACE, and switches in P2Y12inh. There were 149 PLWH included, of these, 119 (80%) were initiated on clopidogrel, 23 (15%) on ticagrelor, and 7 (5%) on prasugrel. 93 PLWH (60%) had a DDI at time of P2Y12inh initiation, with highest incidence in the clopidogrel group (n=84, 71%), followed by ticagrelor (n=9, 39%) and none with prasugrel. Within 1 year, MACE occurred in 12 PLWH, with DDI present at the time of 4 events. There were 29 bleeding events occurring within 1 year, including 17 events with DDI at time of event. However, 88% of DDI in patients with bleeding events were expected to decrease the efficacy of P2Y12inh. Though we observed high incidence of DDI between P2Y12inh and ART in PLWH, MACE and bleeding events at 1 year did not correlate with DDI. It remains unknown if DDI presence at P2Y12inh initiation with ART causes clinical outcomes of concern, or if underlying platelet reactivity in PLWH is associated with these events.

The clinical effect of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) between antiplatelets and antiretrovirals (ART) on bleeding, thrombosis, and other major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) is unknown. The objective of this retrospective study was to assess the incidence of DDI at P2Y12 inhibitor (P2Y12inh) initiation and the effect of DDI on patient outcomes. Adult people living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLWH; HIV) receiving ART newly initiated on an oral P2Y12inh were included. The primary outcome was the incidence of DDI between ART and P2Y12inh at P2Y12inh initiation. Secondary outcomes included bleeding events, MACE, and switches in P2Y12inh. There were 149 PLWH included, of these, 119 (80%) were initiated on clopidogrel, 23 (15%) on ticagrelor, and 7 (5%) on prasugrel. 93 PLWH (60%) had a DDI at time of P2Y12inh initiation, with highest incidence in the clopidogrel group (n=84, 71%), followed by ticagrelor (n=9, 39%) and none with prasugrel. Within 1 year, MACE occurred in 12 PLWH, with DDI present at the time of 4 events. There were 29 bleeding events occurring within 1 year, including 17 events with DDI at time of event. However, 88% of DDI in patients with bleeding events were expected to decrease the efficacy of P2Y12inh. Though we observed high incidence of DDI between P2Y12inh and ART in PLWH, MACE and bleeding events at 1 year did not correlate with DDI. It remains unknown if DDI presence at P2Y12inh initiation with ART causes clinical outcomes of concern, or if underlying platelet reactivity in PLWH is associated with these events.

Intravenous (IV) digoxin loading dose recommendations for rate control of atrial arrhythmias in critically ill patients are not well studied. When using digoxin in the setting of atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF/AFL), a loading dose (LD) in either a fixed-dose regimen, weight-based dose, or pharmacokinetic-based calculation to target a serum digoxin concentration (SDC) of 0.8-1.5 ng/mL is recommended. The objective of this study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of digoxin LD used in critically ill patients for rate control of AF/AFL and to assess the SDC achieved. This single center retrospective cohort study included patients who received IV digoxin and had a SDC drawn. The primary endpoint was the median SDC achieved after a digoxin LD. Secondary outcomes included the frequency of SDCs ≥1.5 ng/mL and heart rate (HR) control. A total of 92 patients were included. The median total LD of digoxin for the entire cohort was 11mcg/kg (750 mcg). For 61% of the cohort, the LD was distributed over six-hour intervals. The median SDC after completion of the IV digoxin LD was 1.3 ng/mL (0.9, 1.7). The incidence of supratherapeutic SDC was 36% for the total cohort. A target HR < 110 beats per minute within 24 hours from digoxin LD was achieved in 60% of the cohort. In conclusion, a median total digoxin LD of 750 mcg in critically ill patients with AF/AFL, targeting a SDC < 1.5ng/mL may be considered for acute rate control, taking into account drug-drug interactions in the cardiac intensive care unit. Future studies are necessary to confirm our findings.

Intravenous (IV) digoxin loading dose recommendations for rate control of atrial arrhythmias in critically ill patients are not well studied. When using digoxin in the setting of atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (AF/AFL), a loading dose (LD) in either a fixed-dose regimen, weight-based dose, or pharmacokinetic-based calculation to target a serum digoxin concentration (SDC) of 0.8-1.5 ng/mL is recommended. The objective of this study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of digoxin LD used in critically ill patients for rate control of AF/AFL and to assess the SDC achieved. This single center retrospective cohort study included patients who received IV digoxin and had a SDC drawn. The primary endpoint was the median SDC achieved after a digoxin LD. Secondary outcomes included the frequency of SDCs ≥1.5 ng/mL and heart rate (HR) control. A total of 92 patients were included. The median total LD of digoxin for the entire cohort was 11mcg/kg (750 mcg). For 61% of the cohort, the LD was distributed over six-hour intervals. The median SDC after completion of the IV digoxin LD was 1.3 ng/mL (0.9, 1.7). The incidence of supratherapeutic SDC was 36% for the total cohort. A target HR < 110 beats per minute within 24 hours from digoxin LD was achieved in 60% of the cohort. In conclusion, a median total digoxin LD of 750 mcg in critically ill patients with AF/AFL, targeting a SDC < 1.5ng/mL may be considered for acute rate control, taking into account drug-drug interactions in the cardiac intensive care unit. Future studies are necessary to confirm our findings.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Data on outcomes between unfractionated heparin and bivalirudin anticoagulation during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in acute coronary syndromes (ACS) remains inconclusive. We aimed to systematically analyze PCI outcomes comparing unfractionated heparin and bivalirudin. METHODS:We systematically searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, and Web of Science from database inception in 1966 through January 2024 for studies evaluating PCI outcomes comparing unfractionated heparin and bivalirudin. Two investigators independently reviewed data. Conflicts were resolved through consensus. Random-effects meta-analyses were used. RESULTS:Ten prospective trials were identified that enrolled 42,253 individuals who presented with an acute coronary syndrome. Our analysis found that heparin when compared to bivalirudin was associated with an increased risk of trial-based definition of major bleeding (RR 1.68, 95% CI 1.29-2.20), non-access site complications (RR 4.6, 95% CI 1.75-12.09), TIMI major bleeding (RR 1.70, 95% CI 1.20-2.41), major bleeding risks (RR 1.87, 95% CI 1.49-2.36), cardiovascular disease death (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.02-1.57), and thrombocytopenia (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.07-2.62). There were no statistically significant differences between heparin and bivalirudin for all-cause mortality, MACE, stroke, reinfarction, target vessel revascularization, acute or stent thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS:The present meta-analysis demonstrates bivalirudin reduces major bleeding when used for anticoagulation during PCI in patients with acute coronary syndromes and is not associated with an increased risk of stent thrombosis or MACE.

BACKGROUND:Evidence supporting anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin (UFH) in patients with an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) to prevent limb ischaemia remains limited, while bleeding risks remain high. Monitoring heparin in this setting with anti-factor Xa (anti-Xa) is not previously described. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The study objective is to describe the incidence of thromboembolic and bleeding events with the use of UFH in patients with an IABP utilising monitoring with both anti-Xa and activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT). METHODS:This is a retrospective study of adults who received an IABP and UFH for ≥24 hours. Electronic medical records were reviewed for pertinent data. The primary outcome was the incidence of limb ischaemia during IABP. Secondary outcomes included myocardial infarction, thrombus on IABP, or stroke. Exploratory outcomes included any venous thromboembolism and bleeding events. RESULTS:Of 159 patients, 88% received an IABP for cardiogenic shock and median duration of IABP support was 118 hours (interquartile range, 67-196). Limb ischaemia occurred in four of 159 patients (2.5%). Strokes occurred in 3.8% of the cohort, and bleeding events occurred in 33%. Despite anticoagulation use in all patients, 11% experienced a venous thromboembolism, with most identified upon asymptomatic screening with concern for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. We found no differences in outcomes that occurred with a hybrid anti-Xa and aPTT versus aPTT monitoring alone. CONCLUSIONS:We observed a high rate of thrombotic and bleeding complications with the use of UFH in patients with an IABP. Use of anti-Xa versus aPTT for monitoring was not associated with complications. These data suggest safer anticoagulation strategies are needed in this setting.

BACKGROUND:Myocardial infarction and heart failure are major cardiovascular diseases that affect millions of people in the US with the morbidity and mortality being highest among patients who develop cardiogenic shock. Early recognition of cardiogenic shock allows prompt implementation of treatment measures. Our objective is to develop a new dynamic risk score, called CShock, to improve early detection of cardiogenic shock in cardiac intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS:We developed and externally validated a deep learning-based risk stratification tool, called CShock, for patients admitted into the cardiac ICU with acute decompensated heart failure and/or myocardial infarction to predict onset of cardiogenic shock. We prepared a cardiac ICU dataset using MIMIC-III database by annotating with physician adjudicated outcomes. This dataset that consisted of 1500 patients with 204 having cardiogenic/mixed shock was then used to train CShock. The features used to train the model for CShock included patient demographics, cardiac ICU admission diagnoses, routinely measured laboratory values and vital signs, and relevant features manually extracted from echocardiogram and left heart catheterization reports. We externally validated the risk model on the New York University (NYU) Langone Health cardiac ICU database that was also annotated with physician adjudicated outcomes. The external validation cohort consisted of 131 patients with 25 patients experiencing cardiogenic/mixed shock. RESULTS:CShock achieved an area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.821 (95% CI 0.792-0.850). CShock was externally validated in the more contemporary NYU cohort and achieved an AUROC of 0.800 (95% CI 0.717-0.884), demonstrating its generalizability in other cardiac ICUs. Having an elevated heart rate is most predictive of cardiogenic shock development based on Shapley values. The other top ten predictors are having an admission diagnosis of myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation, having an admission diagnosis of acute decompensated heart failure, Braden Scale, Glasgow Coma Scale, Blood urea nitrogen, Systolic blood pressure, Serum chloride, Serum sodium, and Arterial blood pH. CONCLUSIONS:The novel CShock score has the potential to provide automated detection and early warning for cardiogenic shock and improve the outcomes for the millions of patients who suffer from myocardial infarction and heart failure.

Cangrelor may be used as a bridge when temporary interruption of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is necessary. However, the optimal dose and monitoring of cangrelor in patients remains unknown, especially in the setting of mechanical circulatory support (MCS). We conducted an observational, single-center, retrospective cohort study of patients that had PCI within 3 months and received cangrelor while admitted to any intensive care unit. The primary outcome was the incidence of any major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE). Secondary outcomes included VerifyNow® platelet reactivity units (PRU) measured while on cangrelor and any bleeding events while on cangrelor. A total of 92 patients were included. The most common reason for cangrelor use was in the periprocedural setting, with or without MCS (42, 45%), followed by NPO status (26, 28%), and MCS alone (22, 24%). The primary outcome of MACE occurred in one patient (1.1%). Out of 92 patients, 77% had a P2Y12 level collected within 24 hours and 89% of the cohort was able to achieve the goal P2Y12 PRU of < 194. The median P2Y12 value was 115 PRU (40, 168 PRU). We observed a bleed event rate of 23% (21/92). We found a standardized protocol of cangrelor dosing in critically ill patients that received a DES in the past 3 months to be successful in achieving a goal P2Y12 PRU. Although the optimal PRU remains unknown, cardiovascular clinicians may monitor these levels to help guide decisions regarding cangrelor management. Future randomized controlled trials should evaluate the optimal PRU threshold to balance risks of ischemia and bleeding.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The mainstay of acute pulmonary embolism (PE) treatment is anticoagulation. Timely anticoagulation correlates with decreased PE-associated mortality, but the ability to achieve a therapeutic activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) with unfractionated heparin (UFH) remains limited. Although some institutions have switched to a more accurate and reproducible test to assess for heparin's effectiveness, the anti-factor Xa (antiXa) assay, data correlating a timely therapeutic antiXa to PE-associated clinical outcomes remains scarce. We evaluated time to a therapeutic antiXa using intravenous heparin after PE response team (PERT) activation and assessed clinical outcomes including bleeding and recurrent thromboembolic events. METHODS:This was a retrospective cohort study at NYU Langone Health. All adult patients ≥18 years with a confirmed PE started on IV UFH with >2 antiXa levels were included. Patients were excluded if they received thrombolysis or alternative anticoagulation. The primary endpoint was the time to a therapeutic antiXa level of 0.3-0.7 units/mL. Secondary outcomes included recurrent thromboembolism, bleeding and PE-associated mortality within 3 months. RESULTS:A total of 330 patients with a PERT consult were identified with 192 patients included. The majority of PEs were classified as sub massive (64.6%) with 87% of patients receiving a bolus of 80 units/kg of UFH prior to starting an infusion at 18 units/kg/hour. The median time to the first therapeutic antiXa was 9.13 hours with 93% of the cohort sustaining therapeutic anticoagulation at 48 hours. Recurrent thromboembolism, bleeding and mortality occurred in 1%, 5% and 6.2%, respectively. Upon univariate analysis, a first antiXa <0.3 units/ml was associated with an increased risk of mortality [27.78% (5/18) vs 8.05% (14/174), p = 0.021]. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:We observed a low incidence of recurrent thromboembolism or PE-associated mortality utilizing an antiXa titrated UFH protocol. The use of an antiXa based heparin assay to guide heparin dosing and monitoring allows for timely and sustained therapeutic anticoagulation for treatment of PE.