Clinical effects of physiologic lesion testing in influencing treatment strategy for multi-vessel coronary artery disease.

Background: The application of fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) in multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) patients has not been definitively explored. We herein assessed how treatment strategies were decided based on FFR/iFR values in vessels selected clinically. Specifically, we sought to determine whether treatment selection was based on whether the vessel tested was the clinical target stenosis. Methods: 270 consecutive patients with angiographically determined multivessel disease who underwent FFR/iFR testing were included. Patients were classified initially based on their angiographic findings, then re-evaluated from FFR/iFR results (normal or abnormal). Tested lesions were classified into target or non-target lesions based on clinical and non-invasive evaluations. Results: Abnormal FFR/iFR values were demonstrated in 51.9 % of patients, in whom 51.4 % received coronary stenting (PCI) and 44.3 % had bypass surgery (CABG). With two-vessel CAD patients, medical therapy was preferred when the target lesion was normal (72.6 %), while PCI was preferred when it was abnormal (78.4 %). In non-target lesions, PCI was preferred regardless of FFR/iFR results (78.0 %). With three-vessel CAD patients, CABG was preferred when the target lesion was abnormal (68.5 %), and there was no difference in the selected modality when it was normal. Furthermore, the incidence of tested lesions was higher in the left anterior descending (LAD) compared to other coronary arteries, and two-vessel CAD patients with LAD stenoses were more frequently treated by PCI. Conclusion: The use of invasive physiologic testing in multivessel CAD patients may alter the preferred treatment strategy, leading to an overall increase in PCI selection.

Shared Decision-Making in Cardiovascular Practice.

Clinical decisions are optimally made collaboratively, with patients and clinicians working together to review all available information and treatment options. A comprehensive dialogue that identifies and brings into focus individual patient goals within the context of the evidence base is the ideal approach. Shared decision-making (SDM) is essential to making choices about treatment preferences and characterizes the optimal practice of evidence-based medicine and good patient care. By supporting patient autonomy and engagement, the patient and family become partners in their health care. Decisions surrounding whether or not to proceed with diagnostic and therapeutic procedures after fully discussing appropriate alternatives are best made considering both the evidence base and patient goals. The central feature of SDM is that a clinician and a patient engage in a dialogue to jointly make decisions, with reciprocated sharing of information that both find beneficial to reach the best decision. SDM entails much more than patient education or informed consent: there must be bidirectional transfer of knowledge, discussion of patient preference, and a process of deliberation reaching consensus. Patient decision aids have been shown to improve patient understanding of options and risks, enhance the patient's involvement, and focus their comprehension of treatment preferences. Patient decision aids also may be of value in strengthening the physician-patient relationship. The need to emphasize SDM should be integrated into the quality process at every level to make it meaningful, not an apparently arbitrary obstacle that requires discovery of a shrewd work-around. A more patient-oriented consideration of the benefits of symptom relief and improved quality of life, in addition to survival and freedom from adverse events, could only be beneficial.

A Multimedia Strategy to Integrate Introductory Broad-Based Radiation Science Education in US Medical Schools.

US physicians in multiple specialties who order or conduct radiological procedures lack formal radiation science education and thus sometimes order procedures of limited benefit or fail to order what is necessary. To this end, a multidisciplinary expert group proposed an introductory broad-based radiation science educational program for US medical schools. Suggested preclinical elements of the curriculum include foundational education on ionizing and nonionizing radiation (eg, definitions, dose metrics, and risk measures) and short- and long-term radiation-related health effects as well as introduction to radiology, radiation therapy, and radiation protection concepts. Recommended clinical elements of the curriculum would impart knowledge and practical experience in radiology, fluoroscopically guided procedures, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and identification of patient subgroups requiring special considerations when selecting specific ionizing or nonionizing diagnostic or therapeutic radiation procedures. Critical components of the clinical program would also include educational material and direct experience with patient-centered communication on benefits of, risks of, and shared decision making about ionizing and nonionizing radiation procedures and on health effects and safety requirements for environmental and occupational exposure to ionizing and nonionizing radiation. Overarching is the introduction to evidence-based guidelines for procedures that maximize clinical benefit while limiting unnecessary risk. The content would be further developed, directed, and integrated within the curriculum by local faculties and would address multiple standard elements of the Liaison Committee on Medical Education and Core Entrustable Professional Activities for Entering Residency of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

Pathophysiologic Mechanisms of Tobacco Smoke Producing Atherosclerosis.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the convincing epidemiologic association between smoking and vascular disease, the pathophysiologic mechanisms by which smoking initiates and contributes to the progression of atherosclerosis remain incompletely understood. A precise dose-dependent correlation has never been demonstrated, suggesting that the biological relationship is complex and influenced by individual genetic and possibly environmental factors. Although endothelial dysfunction and intimal damage appear to be central to atherogenesis, how tobacco products cause this effect has not been established. The purpose of this review is to describe the current state of knowledge of the main pathophysiologic pathways of how tobacco smoking abets atherosclerosis. Constituents of Tobacco Smoke: Tobacco combustion produces a mixture of organic substances. derived from burning organic materials. The predominant gaseous phase constituents include carbon monoxide, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, acrolein, and other carbonyls, as well as nicotine and tobacco-specific nitrosamines. Potential Pathophysiologic Mechanisms: Smoking-induced changes in coronary vasomotor tone, platelet activation, and endothelial integrity are major components of both the development of atherosclerosis and its clinical presentation. Smoking may initiate and accelerate the progression of atherosclerosis by injuring the vascular intima. Other potential mechanisms include intimal damage and endothelial dysfunction, oxidative stress and injury, thrombosis, lipid abnormalities, and inflammation. CONCLUSION: Smoking tobacco products contributes measurably to the incidence of acute vascular events and chronic disease. The causative compound, the exact mechanism of injury, and whether the atherogenic effect is modifiable are not known.

Rates of revascularization and PCI:CABG ratio: a new indicator predicting in-hospital mortality in acute coronary syndromes.

OBJECTIVE: The principal trend in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is increasing utilization of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) and declining coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) utilization. This study was designed to evaluate whether higher PCI:CABG ratios lead to higher in-hospital PCI or CABG mortality. METHODS: The National Readmission Database for years 2016 was queried for all hospitalized ACS patients who underwent coronary revascularization during their admission. The study population was derived from 355 US hospitals and included 103 021 patients. Hospitals were grouped based on their PCI:CABG ratio into low, intermediate, and high ratio quartiles with a median [interquartile ranges (IQR)] PCI:CABG ratio of 2.9 (2.5-3.2), 5.0 (4.3-5.9) and 8.9 (7.8-10.3), respectively multivariable logistic regression with adjustment for age, demographics and comorbidities were used to identify CABG:PCI ratio related risk for in-hospital CABG and PCI mortality. RESULTS: Higher PCI:CABG ratios correlated with an increased CABG mortality. There was a median (IQR) mortality of 2.5% (1.6-4.3) in the low ratio quartile; 3.1% (1.9-5.3) in the intermediate quartiles; and 5.3% (3.2-9.1) in the high ratio quartile (P < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, the PCI:CABG ratio was associated with an increased risk for CABG mortality with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.38 (95% CI, 1.14-1.67, P < 0.001) and 2.17 (95% CI, 1.70-2.80, P < 0.001) for hospitals with intermediate and high PCI:CABG ratios, respectively. There was no significant association between PCI:CABG ratio and PCI mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The programmatic PCI:CABG ratio is a valid indicator of optimal case selection. The PCI:CABG ratio correlates with in-hospital mortality in ACS.

Frailty Predicts Adverse Outcomes in Older Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR): From the National Inpatient Sample.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to study the impact of frailty on the outcome of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database was queried for all patients aged ≥65 years who underwent a TAVR procedure during the years 2016-2017. Frailty was measured using a previously validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) scoring system. The score is ICD-10 code based; thus, it can be calculated from an administrative database. Study outcomes were in-hospital all-cause mortality, peri-procedural complications, length of stay, and total cost. Outcomes were modeled using logistic regression for binary outcomes and generalized linear regression for continuous outcomes. RESULTS: There were 84,750 patients included in the study. These patients were divided into low-risk (61,050), intermediate-risk (22,955), and high-risk (744), based on average frailty index scores of 2, 7, and 16.8, respectively. On multivariable analysis, the HFRS correlated with increased odds for mortality with an adjusted odd ratio (a-OR) of 1.25 (95% CI: 1.22-1.29, p < 0.001), myocardial infarction [a-OR 1.10 (95% CI: 1.07-1.13, p < 0.001)], pericardiocentesis [a-OR 1.16 (95% CI: 1.12-1.20, p < 0.001)], pacemaker insertion [a-OR 1.06 (95% CI: 1.04-1.08, p < 0.001)], blood transfusion [a-OR 1.14 (95% CI: 1.11-1.16, p < 0.001)], vascular complications [a-OR 1.05 (95% CI: 1.00-1.09, p = 0.03)], longer length of stay [a-MR 1.10 (95% CI: 1.10-1.11, p < 0.001)] and higher cost [a-MR: 1.04 (95% CI: 1.03-1.04, p < 0.001)]. CONCLUSION: The HFRS can be utilized in the risk stratification of older patients undergoing TAVR.

Systemic and Coronary Hemodynamic Effects of Tobacco Products on the Cardiovascular System and Potential Pathophysiologic Mechanisms.

Tobacco product usage is the single most preventable cause of death in the United States. Smoking promotes atherosclerosis, producing disease in the coronary arteries, the aorta, the carotid and cerebral arteries and the large arteries in the peripheral circulation. The cardiovascular consequences of tobacco products have been the subject of intensive study for several decades. Despite the overwhelming epidemiologic association between smoking and vascular disease, the pathophysiologic mechanisms by which smoking exerts its deleterious effects remain incompletely understood. This review addresses the acute and long-term systemic and coronary hemodynamic effects of tobacco, with an emphasis of the impact on coronary blood flow and pathophysiologic mechanisms.

In-hospital outcomes of transapical versus surgical aortic valve replacement: from the U.S. national inpatient sample.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TA-TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) using a large US population sample. METHODS: The U.S. National Inpatient Sample was queried for all patients who underwent TA-TAVR or SAVR during the years 2016-2017. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital stroke, pericardiocentesis, pacemaker insertion, mechanical ventilation, vascular complications, major bleeding, acute kidney injury, length of stay, and cost of hospitalization. Outcomes were modeled using multi-variable logistic regression for binary outcomes and generalized linear models for continuous outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 1560 TA-TAVR and 44,280 SAVR patients were included. Patients who underwent TA-TAVR were older and frailer. Compared to SAVR, TA-TAVR correlated with a higher mortality (4.5% vs. 2.7%, effect size (SMD) = 0.1) and higher periprocedural complications. Following multivariable analysis, both TA-TAVR and SAVR had a similar adjusted risk for in-hospital mortality. TA-TAVR correlated with lower odds of bleeding with (adjusted OR (aOR) = 0.26; 95% CI: 0.18-0.38;P < 0.001), and a shorter length of stay (adjusted mean ratio (aMR) = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.69-0.84; P < 0.001), but higher cost (aMR = 1.18; 95% CI: 1.10-1.28; P < 0.001). No significant differences in other study outcomes. In subgroup analysis, TA-TAVR in patients with chronic lung disease had higher odds for mortality (aOR = 3.11; 95%CI: 1.37-7.08; P = 0.007). CONCLUSION: The risk-adjusted analysis showed that TA-TAVR has no advantage over SAVR except for patients with chronic lung disease where TA-TAVR has higher mortality.

The appropriate use criteria: Improvements for its integration into real world clinical practice.

The purpose of this position statement is to suggest ways in which future appropriate use criteria (AUC) for coronary revascularization might be restructured to: (1) incorporate improvement in quality of life and angina relief as primary goals of therapy, (2) integrate the findings of recent trials into quality appraisal, (3) employ the combined information of the coronary angiogram and invasive physiologic measurements together with the results of stress test imaging to assess risk, and (4) recognize the essential role that patient preference plays in making individualized therapeutic decisions. The AUC is a valuable tool within the quality assurance process; it is vital that interventionists ensure that percutaneous coronary intervention case selection is both evidence-based and patient oriented. Appropriate patient selection is an important quality indicator and adherence to evidence-based practice should be one metric in a portfolio of process and outcome indicators that measure quality.

Should Interventional Cardiologists Super-Subspecialize?: Moving From Patient Selection to Operator Selection.

The field of interventional cardiology has expanded rapidly. As a result, four evolving areas have evolved - peripheral vascular interventions, structural heart interventions, adult congenital heart intervention, and chronic total occlusion. The complexity of these procedures and the number of devices available has grown rapidly. In addition, the professional and public expectations of procedural success and of minimizing case-avoidance have also grown. Specific issues include volume-outcome relationships, maintaining currency and proficiency, accessibility to specialized procedures, and the need to maintain a fundamental level of expertise in acute coronary interventions.