Initial experience with stylet-driven versus lumenless lead delivery systems for left bundle branch area pacing.

INTRODUCTION: Left bundle branch area pacing (LBBP) has emerged as an alternative method for conduction system pacing. While initial experience with delivery systems for stylet-driven and lumenless lead implantation for LBBP has been described, data comparing outcomes of stylet-driven versus lumenless lead implantation for LBBP are limited. In this study, we compare success rates and outcomes of LBBP with stylet-driven versus lumenless lead delivery systems. METHODS: Eighty-three consecutive patients (mean age 74.1 ± 11.2 years; 56 [68%] male) undergoing attempted LBBP at a single institution were identified. Cases were grouped by lead delivery systems used: stylet-driven (n = 53) or lumenless (n = 30). Baseline characteristics and procedural findings were recorded and compared between the cohorts. Intermediate term follow-up data on ventricular lead parameters were also compared. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Successful LBBP was achieved in 77% of patients, with similar success rates between groups (76% in stylet-driven, 80% in lumenless, p = 0.79), and rates of adjudicated LBB capture and other paced QRS parameters were also similar. Compared with the lumenless group, the stylet-driven group had significantly shorter procedure times (90 ± 4 vs. 112 ± 31 min, p = 0.004) and fluoroscopy times (10 ± 5 vs. 15 ± 6 min, p = 0.003). Ventricular lead parameters at follow-up were similar, and rates of procedural complications and need for lead revision were low in both groups. CONCLUSION: Delivery systems for stylet-driven and for lumenless leads for LBBP have comparable acute success rates. Long-term follow-up of lead performance following use of the various delivery systems is warranted.

The Intersection of Type 2 Myocardial Infarction and Heart Failure.

Background Type 2 myocardial infarction (T2MI) is common and associated with high cardiovascular event rates. However, the relationship between T2MI and heart failure (HF) is uncertain. Methods and Results We identified patients with T2MI at a large tertiary hospital between October 2017 and May 2018. Patient characteristics, causes of T2MI, and subsequent HF hospitalizations were determined by physician chart review. We identified 359 patients with T2MI over the study period; 184 patients had a history of HF. Among patients with ejection fraction (EF) assessment (N=180), the majority had preserved EF (N=107; 59.4%), followed by reduced EF (N=54; 30.0%), and mid-range EF (N=19; 10.6%). Acute HF was the most common cause of T2MI (20.9%). Of those whose T2MI was precipitated by HF (N=75), the mean EF was 53.0±16.8% and 16 (21.3%) were de novo diagnoses of HF. Among patients with T2MI who were discharged alive with available follow-up (N=289), 5.5% were hospitalized with acute HF within 30 days, 17.3% within 180 days, and 22.1% within 1 year. In subgroup analyses, among patients with T2MI with prevalent or new HF (N=161), the rate of HF hospitalization at 1 year was 34.2%, considerably higher than those with T2MI and no HF diagnosis at discharge (7.0%; N=9/128). Conclusions Index presentations of HF or worsening chronic HF represent the most common causes of T2MI. ≈1 in 5 patients with T2MI will be readmitted for HF within 1 year of their event. Strategies to prevent HF events after a T2MI are needed.

Early clinical and sociodemographic experience with patients hospitalized with COVID-19 at a large American healthcare system.

BACKGROUND: Despite over 4 million cases of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the United States, limited data exist including socioeconomic background and post-discharge outcomes for patients hospitalized with this disease. METHODS: In this case series, we identified patients with COVID-19 admitted to 3 Partners Healthcare hospitals in Boston, Massachusetts between March 7th, 2020, and March 30th, 2020. Patient characteristics, treatment strategies, and outcomes were determined. FINDINGS: A total of 247 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were identified; the median age was 61 (interquartile range [IQR]: 50-76 years), 58% were men, 30% of Hispanic ethnicity, 21% enrolled in Medicaid, and 12% dual-enrolled Medicare/Medicaid. The median estimated household income was $66,701 [IQR: $50,336-$86,601]. Most patients were treated with hydroxychloroquine (72%), and statins (76%; newly initiated in 34%). During their admission, 103 patients (42%) required intensive care. At the end of the data collection period (June 24, 2020), 213 patients (86.2%) were discharged alive, 2 patients (0.8%) remain admitted, and 32 patients (13%) have died. Among those discharged alive (n = 213), 70 (32.9%) were discharged to a post-acute facility, 31 (14.6%) newly required supplemental oxygen, 19 (8.9%) newly required tube feeding, and 34 (16%) required new prescriptions for antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, methadone, or opioids. Over a median post-discharge follow-up of 80 days (IQR, 68-84), 22 patients (10.3%) were readmitted. INTERPRETATION: Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 are frequently of vulnerable socioeconomic status and often require intensive care. Patients who survive COVID-19 hospitalization have substantial need for post-acute services.

Home-Time After Discharge Among Patients With Type 2 Myocardial Infarction.

Background Home-time, defined as the time spent alive outside of a healthcare institution, has emerged as a patient-centered health outcome. The discharge locations and distribution of home-time after a type 2 myocardial infarction are unknown. Methods and Results Patients with a type 2 myocardial infarction between October 2017 and May 2018 at Massachusetts General Hospital were included. Patients discharged to hospice or without follow-up data were excluded. Our primary outcome was home-time defined as the number of days lived outside of a hospital, long-term acute care facility, skilled nursing facility, or rehabilitation facility. We identified 359 patients with type 2 myocardial infarction over the study period. Of those discharged alive (N=321), 62.9% were discharged home, and the remainder went to a facility or hospice. Among those with available follow-up data (N=289), the median home-time was 30 (interquartile range [IQR], 16-30) days at 30 days, 171 (IQR, 133-180) days at 180 days, and 347 (IQR, 203-362) days at 365 days. At 1 year, 29 patients (10%) with type 2 myocardial infarction had spent no time at home and only 57 patients (19.7%) spent the entire year alive and at home. At 1 year, postdischarge all-cause mortality was 23.2%, all-cause readmission was 69.2%, and major adverse cardiovascular events (composite of all-cause mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction, or stroke) was 34.9%. Home-time through 1 year correlated strongly with time-to-event all-cause mortality (τ=0.54, P<0.001) and major adverse cardiovascular events (τ=0.52, P<0.001) and modestly with a composite of all-cause mortality or readmission (τ=0.44, P<0.001). Conclusions Home-time is low after a hospitalization for type 2 myocardial infarction and correlates strongly with mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events.

Misclassification of Myocardial Injury as Myocardial Infarction: Implications for Assessing Outcomes in Value-Based Programs.

Importance: Similar to other patients with acute myocardial infarction, patients with type 2 myocardial infarction (T2MI) are included in several value-based programs, including the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program and the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing Program. To our knowledge, whether nonischemic myocardial injury is being misclassified as T2MI is unknown and may have implications for these programs. Objective: To determine whether patients with nonischemic myocardial injury are being miscoded as having T2MI and if this has implications for 30-day readmission and mortality rates. Design, Settings, and Participants: Using the new International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision code, we identified patients who were coded as having T2MI between October 2017 and May 2018 at Massachusetts General Hospital. Strict adjudication using the fourth universal definition of MI was then applied. Main outcome and Measures: Clinical adjudication of T2MI and 30-day readmission and mortality rates as a function of T2MI or nonischemic myocardial injury. Results: Of 633 patients, 369 (58.3%) were men and 514 (81.2%) were white. After strict adjudication, 359 (56.7%) had T2MI, 265 (41.9%) had myocardial injury, 6 (0.9%) had type 1 MI, and 3 (0.5%) had unstable angina. Patients with T2MI had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular comorbidities than those with myocardial injury. Patients with T2MI and myocardial injury had high in-hospital mortality rates (10.6% and 8.7%, respectively; P = .50). Of those discharged alive (563 [88.9%]), 30-day readmission rates (22.7% vs 21.1%; P = .68) and mortality rates (4.4% vs 7.4%; P = .14) were comparable among patients with T2MI and myocardial injury. Conclusions and Relevance: A substantial percentage of patients coded as having T2MI actually have myocardial injury. Both conditions have high 30-day readmission and mortality rates. Including patients with high-risk myocardial injury may have substantial implications for value-based programs.

Angiopoietin-like protein 4: A therapeutic target for triglycerides and coronary disease?

The angiopoietin-like proteins are a family of proteins that share structural similarities to the angiopoietins. These proteins have been described to play a key role in the regulation of a myriad of physiologic processes, including serving as essential modulators of lipid and glucose metabolism. Angiopoietin-like protein 4 (ANGPTL4) is a key regulator of lipoprotein lipase, and its modulation has been shown to significantly impact the body's processing and distribution of triglycerides and cholesterol. Although more research remains to elucidate the full range of mechanisms through which ANGPTL4 affects triglyceride and cholesterol homeostasis, current research has associated decreased ANGPTL4 function with a beneficial effect on lipid parameters and overall cardiovascular disease risk, opening the possibility of ANGPTL4 as a new therapeutic target for the treatment of cardiovascular disease.