Development and Validation of a Natural Language Processing Model to Identify Low-Risk Pulmonary Embolism in Real Time to Facilitate Safe Outpatient Management.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to (1) develop and validate a natural language processing model to identify the presence of pulmonary embolism (PE) based on real-time radiology reports and (2) identify low-risk PE patients based on previously validated risk stratification scores using variables extracted from the electronic health record at the time of diagnosis. The combination of these approaches yielded an natural language processing-based clinical decision support tool that can identify patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with low-risk PE as candidates for outpatient management. METHODS: Data were curated from all patients who received a PE-protocol computed tomography pulmonary angiogram (PE-CTPA) imaging study in the ED of a 3-hospital academic health system between June 1, 2018 and December 31, 2020 (n=12,183). The "preliminary" radiology reports from these imaging studies made available to ED clinicians at the time of diagnosis were adjudicated as positive or negative for PE by the clinical team. The reports were then divided into development, internal validation, and temporal validation cohorts in order to train, test, and validate an natural language processing model that could identify the presence of PE based on unstructured text. For risk stratification, patient- and encounter-level data elements were curated from the electronic health record and used to compute a real-time simplified pulmonary embolism severity (sPESI) score at the time of diagnosis. Chart abstraction was performed on all low-risk PE patients admitted for inpatient management. RESULTS: When applied to the internal validation and temporal validation cohorts, the natural language processing model identified the presence of PE from radiology reports with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.99, sensitivity of 0.86 to 0.87, and specificity of 0.99. Across cohorts, 10.5% of PE-CTPA studies were positive for PE, of which 22.2% were classified as low-risk by the sPESI score. Of all low-risk PE patients, 74.3% were admitted for inpatient management. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that a natural language processing-based model utilizing real-time radiology reports can accurately identify patients with PE. Further, this model, used in combination with a validated risk stratification score (sPESI), provides a clinical decision support tool that accurately identifies patients in the ED with low-risk PE as candidates for outpatient management.

Clinical events classification (CEC) in clinical trials: Report on the current landscape and future directions - proceedings from the CEC Summit 2018.

IMPORTANCE: Clinical events adjudication is pivotal for generating consistent and comparable evidence in clinical trials. The methodology of event adjudication is evolving, but research is needed to develop best practices and spur innovation. OBSERVATIONS: A meeting of stakeholders from regulatory agencies, academic and contract research organizations, pharmaceutical and device companies, and clinical trialists convened in Chicago, IL, for Clinical Events Classification (CEC) Summit 2018 to discuss key topics and future directions. Formal studies are lacking on strategies to optimize CEC conduct, improve efficiency, minimize cost, and generally increase the speed and accuracy of the event adjudication process. Major challenges to CEC discussed included ensuring rigorous quality of the process, identifying safety events, standardizing event definitions, using uniform strategies for missing information, facilitating interactions between CEC members and other trial leadership, and determining the CEC's role in pragmatic trials or trials using real-world data. Consensus recommendations from the meeting include the following: (1) ensure an adequate adjudication infrastructure; (2) use negatively adjudicated events to identify important safety events reported only outside the scope of the primary endpoint; (3) conduct further research in the use of artificial intelligence and digital/mobile technologies to streamline adjudication processes; and (4) emphasize the importance of standardizing event definitions and quality metrics of CEC programs. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: As novel strategies for clinical trials emerge to generate evidence for regulatory approval and to guide clinical practice, a greater understanding of the role of the CEC process will be critical to optimize trial conduct and increase confidence in the data generated.

Paclitaxel-coated devices in the treatment of femoropopliteal stenosis among patients ≥65 years old: An ACC PVI Registry Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The connection between paclitaxel-coated devices (PCD) use during peripheral vascular interventions (PVI) and mortality is debated. We aimed to analyze patterns of PCD use and the safety and effectiveness of PCD use in the superficial femoral and/or popliteal arteries. METHODS: Patients undergoing PVI of femoropopliteal lesions with and without PCD between January 1, 2015 and June 30, 2017 were compared using the American College of Cardiology's National Cardiovascular Data Registry PVI Registry. Outcomes were derived from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid claims data. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 6-, 12-, and 24-months following PVI. Inverse probability weighting and frailty models were used to assess the differences between groups. The analysis was IRB-approved. RESULTS: In the overall cohort consisting of 6,302 femoropopliteal PVIs, PCD-PVI patients were more likely to be treated for claudication (63.5% vs 51.3%, P< .001), less likely to have a chronic total occlusion (24.6% vs 34.7%, P < .001), and more likely to be treated in certain geographic and practice settings. In the analytic cohort consisting of 1,666 femoropopliteal PVIs with linked claims outcomes (888 PCD-PVI, 53.3%), unadjusted rates of all outcomes were lower in PCD-PVI patients. After adjustment, there were no significant differences in mortality following PCD-PVI versus non-PCD PVI at 1 year (adjusted RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.60-1.01, P= .055) or 2 years (aRR 0.98, 95% CI 0.77-1.24, P= .844). CONCLUSION: There were significant differences between the patients in whom and settings in which PCD-PVI was versus was not used. PCD-PVI was not associated with an increased risk of 2-year mortality in real-world use.

Development and validation of a predictive model for bleeding after peripheral vascular intervention: A report from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Peripheral Vascular Interventions Registry.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a model to predict risk of in-hospital bleeding following endovascular peripheral vascular intervention. BACKGROUND: Peri-procedural bleeding is a common, potentially preventable complication of catheter-based peripheral vascular procedures and is associated with increased mortality. We used the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) Peripheral Vascular Interventions (PVI) Registry to develop a novel risk-prediction model to identify patients who may derive the greatest benefit from application of strategies to prevent bleeding. METHODS: We examined all patients undergoing lower extremity PVI at 76 NCDR PVI hospitals from 2014 to 2017. Patients with acute limb ischemia (n = 1600) were excluded. Major bleeding was defined as overt bleeding with a hemoglobin (Hb) drop of ≥ 3 g/dl, any Hb decline of ≥ 4 g/dl, or a blood transfusion in patients with pre-procedure Hb ≥ 8 g/dl. Hierarchical multivariable logistic regression was used to develop a risk model to predict major bleeding. Model validation was performed using 1000 bootstrapped replicates of the population after sampling with replacement. RESULTS: Among 25,382 eligible patients, 1017 (4.0%) developed major bleeding. Predictors of bleeding included age, female sex, critical limb ischemia, non-femoral access, prior heart failure, and pre-procedure hemoglobin. The model demonstrated good discrimination (optimism corrected c-statistic = 0.67), calibration (corrected slope = 0.98, intercept of -0.04) and range of predicted risk (1%-18%). CONCLUSIONS: Post-procedural PVI bleeding risk can be predicted based upon pre- and peri-procedural patient characteristics. Further studies are needed to determine whether this model can be utilized to improve procedural safety through developing and targeting bleeding avoidance strategies.

Understanding the patient experience of pain and discomfort during cardiac catheterization.

OBJECTIVES: Patient centeredness is an essential component of high-quality care, yet little is known regarding the patient experience during procedures performed in the cardiac catheterization lab. BACKGROUND: Available literature focuses on the safe delivery of sedation, but does not address patient-reported satisfaction or comfort. Further delineation of how procedural factors impact the patient experience is needed. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, exploratory analysis of adult cardiac catheterization outpatients (n = 375) receiving physician ordered, nurse administered procedural sedation (benzodiazepine and/or opioids) between April and June, 2017. Data were abstracted from the procedural database, Electronic Health Record, and Press Ganey© surveys. RESULTS: The mean age was 63 (SD 12.2), a majority were male (n = 226; 60%), white (n = 271; 73%), and overweight (mean body mass index = 29, SD 6.8). Patient-reported satisfaction with pain control and perceived staff concern for comfort were >75th percentile (Press Ganey© survey), with no difference in preprocedure and postprocedure pain scores (p = .596). Intraprocedural medication dose range and mean frequency were highly variable: midazolam (0.25-5.5 mg; 1.48); fentanyl (12.5-200 mcg; 1.63); and hydromorphone (0.5-2.5 mg; 1.33). Median time interval between administration of initial sedation and local anesthetic was 6 min. Patients with longer intervals had less frequent dosing (p < .001) and less total procedural sedation (p < .001). Sensitivity analysis revealed that trainee/fellow involvement (p = .001), younger age (p = .002), and shorter time intervals (p < .001) were associated with increased frequency and larger total dose. CONCLUSIONS: Waiting to gain vascular access following administration of procedural was associated with less frequent subsequent dosing, lower overall administration, and similar patient satisfaction. Optimizing processes for administering periprocedural sedation may allow for less medication without impacting patient experience.

Role of health plan administrative claims data in participant recruitment for pragmatic clinical trials: An Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-term Effectiveness (ADAPTABLE) example.

AIM: The purpose of this study is to evaluate HealthCore/Anthem Research Network recruitment strategies, compare response and enrollment rates for different recruitment strategies, and describe demographic and clinical characteristics of responders and enrollees. METHODS: HealthCore/Anthem Research Network, a part of the Health Plan Research Network of the Patient-Centered Clinical Data Research Network, used administrative claims data to identify eligible health plan members for potential participation in the Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-term Effectiveness study. We approached health plan members, identified with a validated Patient-Centered Clinical Data Research Network common data model computable phenotype, and their clinical providers during November 2017 to August 2018. Providers were offered the option to exclude their patients' participation in Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-term Effectiveness prior to our direct patient (member) outreach. Member identification was in two phases: Phase 1: 1 January 2006 to 1 April 2017, and Phase 2: 1 January 2006 to 2 February 2018. Phase 1 consisted of two batches of mail and one phone call per patient. In Phase 2, which included two similar batches of patients, outreach was via either mail or brochure and one phone call. RESULTS: Phase 1 and Phase 2 included 133,373 and 51,777 members, respectively. We engaged 28,593 providers in Phase 1, and 5077 in Phase 2. In Phase 1, 264,158 mixed email/mail messages were delivered to 133,373 members, followed by 90,481 phone calls from November 2017 to February 2018. In Phase 2, after simple randomization to letter or brochure, 51,777 members were sent email/mail or mailed brochure in three waves from May 2018 to July 2018. In this 9-week period, 51,623 communications were sent to 25,914 members in the email/mail group, and 50,160 brochures to 25,863 in the brochure group. Following email/mail or mailed brochure outreach, 16,624 and 16,580 calls were made to the groups, respectively. Overall, 1549 health plan members visited the study portal by 1 September 2018; 355 electronically signed the Informed Consent Form and enrolled. Mailed brochures drove more portal visits in Phase 2, but a lower percentage of responders enrolled. Recruitment was better in Phase 2-2.3 enrollees per 1000 outreach members versus 1.8 in Phase 1. CONCLUSION: This study showed the ability of a health plan within Patient-Centered Clinical Data Research Network to identify potential study participants with administrative claims, and use different outreach methods to facilitate recruitment and enrollment for pragmatic clinical trials.

Incidence, timing, and type of first and recurrent ischemic events in patients with and without peripheral artery disease after an acute coronary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) are known to have an increased risk of ischemic cardiovascular events. However, the influence of concomitant PAD on first and subsequent recurrent ischemic events after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains poorly characterized. METHODS: We analyzed the combined data set from 4 randomized trials (PLATO, APPRAISE-2, TRA-CER, and TRILOGY ACS) in ACS for a follow-up length of 1 year. Using multivariable regression, we examined the association between PAD and major adverse cardiovascular events, a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Among patients with a nonfatal first event, we evaluated the incidence and type of a second recurrent event. RESULTS: A total of 4,098 of 48,094 (8.5%) post-ACS patients had a history of PAD. The unadjusted frequency of major adverse cardiovascular events was 2-fold higher in patients with PAD (14.3% vs 7.5%) over a median (25th-75th) follow-up of 353 (223-365) days with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.63 (95% CI: 1.48-1.78; P < .001). The frequency of recurrent ischemic events among those patients with a first, nonfatal event was higher among those with PAD (40.0% vs 27.7%). The relative frequency of each event type (cardiovascular death, noncardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) within first and subsequent ischemic events was similar regardless of PAD status at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PAD have a significantly higher risk of first and recurrent ischemic events in the post-ACS setting. These findings highlight the opportunity for improved treatments in patients with PAD who experience an ACS.

Comparison of visual assessment of coronary stenosis with independent quantitative coronary angiography: Findings from the Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain (PROMISE) trial.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes in patients by visual assessment and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) for obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) are not known. Our objectives were to compare visual and QCA estimates of obstructive CAD and to assess their relationship to outcomes in stable patients with symptoms of CAD. METHODS: The PROMISE trial randomized 10,003 patients with CAD symptoms to anatomical or functional testing. Site reports of invasive angiography detailing visual stenosis and independent, blinded QCA were performed for obstructive CAD (≥50% stenosis). Disagreement between methods was determined and compared with outcomes (death, myocardial infarction, unstable angina hospitalization, or major procedural complications). RESULTS: Of 929 patients (9.3% of PROMISE cohort) with angiograms assessed by sites and QCA, 593 (64%) had obstructive CAD per site reports, whereas 428 (46%) had stenosis ≥50% per QCA. Results differed in 177 patients (disagreement rate 19.1%, κ=0.63), of whom 171 had CAD per sites but not per QCA. One-year unadjusted Kaplan-Meier event rates were highest (5.1%) when QCA and visual assessment agreed for CAD, lowest (0.9%) when the 2 agreed for no obstructive CAD, and intermediate (3.1%) for patients who had CAD per visual assessment but not per QCA. CONCLUSIONS: Visual estimation of angiograms results in more frequent diagnosis of obstructive CAD as compared with QCA. Concordance of results for presence or absence of obstructive CAD was associated with high and low event rates, respectively. Disagreement was associated with intermediate event rates, suggesting that cardiologists integrated clinical information into routine visual assessment of angiograms.

Efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban compared with warfarin in patients with peripheral artery disease and non-valvular atrial fibrillation: insights from ROCKET AF.

AIMS: Vascular disease is included in a risk scoring system to predict stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). This post hoc analysis of ROCKET AF aimed to determine the absolute rates of stroke and bleeding, and the relative effectiveness and safety of rivaroxaban vs. warfarin in patients with and without peripheral artery disease (PAD). Peripheral artery disease was defined on the case-report form as the presences of intermittent claudication, amputation for arterial insufficiency, vascular reconstruction, bypass surgery, or percutaneous intervention to the extremities, or previously documented abdominal aortic aneurysm. METHODS AND RESULTS: ROCKET AF was a double-blind, double-dummy, randomized-controlled trial comparing rivaroxaban and warfarin for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism. A total of 839 (5.9%) patients in ROCKET AF had PAD. Patients with and without PAD had similar rates of stroke or systemic embolism [HR: 1.04, 95% CI (0.72, 1.50), P = 0.84] and major or non-major clinically relevant (NMCR) bleeding [HR: 1.11, 95% CI (0.96, 1.28), P = 0.17], respectively. The efficacy of rivaroxaban when compared with warfarin for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism was similar in patients with PAD (HR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.63-2.22) and without PAD (HR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.73-1.02; interaction P = 0.34). There was a significant interaction for major or NMCR bleeding in patients with PAD treated with rivaroxaban compared with warfarin (HR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.06-1.86) compared with those without PAD (HR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.95-1.11; interaction P = 0.037). CONCLUSION: Patients with PAD in ROCKET AF did not have a statistically significant higher risk of stroke or systemic embolism than patients without PAD, and there were similar efficacy outcomes in patients treated with rivaroxaban and warfarin. In PAD patients, there was a higher risk of major bleeding or NMCR bleeding with rivaroxaban when compared with warfarin (interaction P = 0.037). Further investigation is warranted to validate this subgroup analysis and determine the optimal treatment in this high-risk cohort of AF patients with PAD.

Vorapaxar in patients with peripheral artery disease and acute coronary syndrome: insights from Thrombin Receptor Antagonist for Clinical Event Reduction in Acute Coronary Syndrome (TRACER).

BACKGROUND: In the TRACER trial, vorapaxar, a protease-activated receptor-1 antagonist, plus standard care in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE ACS) patients did not significantly reduce the primary composite end point but reduced a key secondary end point and significantly increased bleeding. History of peripheral artery disease (PAD) was a risk-enrichment inclusion criterion. We investigated the efficacy and safety of vorapaxar in NSTE ACS patients with documented PAD. METHODS: TRACER was a double-blind, randomized trial comparing vorapaxar with placebo in 12,944 patients with NSTE ACS. RESULTS: In total, 936 (7.2%) patients had a history of PAD. Ischemic events occurred more frequently among patients with PAD (25.3%) versus no PAD (12.2%, P < .001), and Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries moderate/severe bleeding was more common in PAD (9.1%) versus no PAD (5.0%, P = .004). Similar rates of the composite end point (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) occurred in patients with PAD treated with vorapaxar and placebo (21.7% vs 24.8%, P interaction = .787). Patients with PAD treated with vorapaxar, when compared with placebo, also had a numerical reduction in peripheral revascularization procedures (8.1% vs 9.0%, P = .158) and a lower extremity amputation rate (0.9% vs 1.5%, P = .107). Vorapaxar increased Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries moderate/severe bleeding similarly in patients with PAD (hazard ratio 1.47, 95% CI 0.89-2.45) and without (hazard ratio 1.48, 95% CI 1.22-1.79; P interaction = .921). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with NSTE ACS and PAD were at increased risk for ischemic events. Lower rates of ischemic end points, peripheral revascularization, and amputation with vorapaxar did not reach statistical significance but warrant further investigation. Vorapaxar increased bleeding in both patients with and without PAD at a similar magnitude of risk.

Effect of SGLT2 inhibitors on heart failure outcomes and cardiovascular death across the cardiometabolic disease spectrum: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have been studied in patients with heart failure, type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, and acute myocardial infarction. Individual trials were powered to study composite outcomes in one disease state. We aimed to evaluate the treatment effect of SGLT2 inhibitors on specific clinical endpoints across multiple demographic and disease subgroups. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we queried online databases (PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and SCOPUS) up to Feb 10, 2024, for primary and secondary analyses of large trials (n>1000) of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with heart failure, type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (including acute myocardial infarction). Outcomes studied included composite of first hospitalisation for heart failure or cardiovascular death, first hospitalisation for heart failure, cardiovascular death, total (first and recurrent) hospitalisation for heart failure, and all-cause mortality. Effect sizes were pooled using random-effects models. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42024513836. FINDINGS: We included 15 trials (N=100 952). Compared with placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors reduced the risk of first hospitalisation for heart failure by 29% in patients with heart failure (hazard ratio [HR] 0·71 [95% CI 0·67-0·77]), 28% in patients with type 2 diabetes (0·72 [0·67-0·77]), 32% in patients with chronic kidney disease (0·68 [0·61-0·77]), and 28% in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (0·72 [0·66-0·79]). SGLT2 inhibitors reduced cardiovascular death by 14% in patients with heart failure (HR 0·86 [95% CI 0·79-0·93]), 15% in patients with type 2 diabetes (0·85 [0·79-0·91]), 11% in patients with chronic kidney disease (0·89 [0·82-0·96]), and 13% in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (0·87 [0·78-0·97]). The benefit of SGLT2 inhibitors on both first hospitalisation for heart failure and cardiovascular death was consistent across the majority of the 51 subgroups studied. Notable exceptions included acute myocardial infarction (22% reduction in first hospitalisation for heart failure; no effect on cardiovascular death) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (26% reduction in first hospitalisation for heart failure; no effect on cardiovascular death). INTERPRETATION: SGLT2 inhibitors reduced heart failure events and cardiovascular death in patients with heart failure, type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. These effects were consistent across a wide range of subgroups within these populations. This supports the eligibility of a large population with cardiorenal-metabolic diseases for treatment with SGLT2 inhibitors. FUNDING: None.

Effects of albiglutide on myocardial infarction and ischemic heart disease outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease in the Harmony Outcomes trial.

AIMS: Large outcome trials have demonstrated cardiovascular benefits of selected glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists. We examined coronary disease outcomes in the Harmony Outcomes trial of the GLP-1 receptor agonist albiglutide. METHODS AND RESULTS: Harmony Outcomes was an event-driven, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving 9 463 patients > 40years of age with type-2 diabetes and established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. It tested the effects of albiglutide on the occurrence of a composite primary endpoint, consisting of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke. Within this post-hoc analysis, the effects of albiglutide on myocardial infarction subtypes and other ischemic endpoints were analyzed.During the median-follow up of 1.6 years, a total of 421 patients (4.5%) experienced at least one myocardial infarction, with 72 patients having more than one event. Treatment with albiglutide reduced both first events (hazard ratio (HR)0.75 (0.62-0.91)) and overall events (HR0.75 (0.61-0.91)) as well as first type 1 (HR0.73 (0.57-0.92)) and type 2 myocardial infarctions (HR0.65 (0.46-0.92)). The effect of albiglutide treatment was consistent for ST-segment elevation (HR0.69 (0.38-1.26)) and non-ST elevation (HR0.86 (0.66-1.2) myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with the GLP-1 receptor agonist albiglutide resulted in a 25% relative risk reduction in myocardial infarction that was consistent for type of infarction and presence or absence of ST elevation. Our findings add novel information about the effects of GLP-1 receptor agonists on ischemic events in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Kidney and Cardiovascular Effectiveness of Empagliflozin Compared With Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes.

Placebo-controlled trials of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors demonstrate kidney and cardiovascular benefits for patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CKD). We used real-world data to compare the kidney and cardiovascular effectiveness of empagliflozin to dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4is), a commonly prescribed antiglycemic medication, in a diverse population with and without CKD. Using electronic health record data from 20 large US health systems, we leveraged propensity overlap weighting to compare the outcomes for empagliflozin and DPP4i initiators with type 2 diabetes between 2016 and 2020. The primary composite kidney outcome included 40% estimated glomerular filtration rate decrease, incident end-stage kidney disease, or all-cause mortality through 2 years or censoring. We also assessed cardiovascular and safety outcomes. Of 62,197 new users, 20,279 initiated empagliflozin and 41,918 initiated DPP4i. Over a median follow-up of 1.1 years, empagliflozin prescription was associated with a lower risk of the primary outcome (hazard ratio [HR] 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65 to 0.87) than DPP4is. The risks for mortality (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.92) and a cardiovascular composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, or all-cause mortality (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.95) were also lower for empagliflozin initiators. No difference in heart failure hospitalization risk between groups was observed. Genital mycotic infections were more common in patients prescribed empagliflozin (HR 1.72, 95% CI 1.58 to 1.88). Empagliflozin was associated with a lower risk of the primary outcome in patients with CKD (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.88) and those without CKD (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.94). In conclusion, the initiation of empagliflozin was associated with a significantly lower risk of kidney and cardiovascular outcomes than DPP4is over a median of just over 1 year. The association with a lower risk for clinical outcomes was apparent even for patients without known CKD at baseline.

Rural-urban outcome differences associated with COVID-19 hospitalizations in North Carolina.

People living in rural regions in the United States face more health challenges than their non-rural counterparts which could put them at additional risks during the COVID-19 pandemic. Few studies have examined if rurality is associated with additional mortality risk among those hospitalized for COVID-19. We studied a retrospective cohort of 3,991 people hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infections discharged between March 1 and September 30, 2020 in one of 17 hospitals in North Carolina that collaborate as a clinical data research network. Patient demographics, comorbidities, symptoms and laboratory data were examined. Logistic regression was used to evaluate associations of rurality with a composite outcome of death/hospice discharge. Comorbidities were more common in the rural patient population as were the number of comorbidities per patient. Overall, 505 patients died prior to discharge and 63 patients were discharged to hospice. Among rural patients, 16.5% died or were discharged to hospice vs. 13.3% in the urban cohort resulting in greater odds of death/hospice discharge (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1, 1.6). This estimate decreased minimally when adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, payer, disease comorbidities, presenting oxygen levels and cytokine levels (adjusted model OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.0, 1.5). This analysis demonstrated a higher COVID-19 mortality risk among rural residents of NC. Implementing policy changes may mitigate such disparities going forward.

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The "2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the diagnosis, genetic evaluation and family screening, medical therapy, endovascular and surgical treatment, and long-term surveillance of patients with aortic disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, stable symptomatic, and acute aortic syndromes). METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 2021 to April 2021, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through June 2022 during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee, where appropriate. STRUCTURE: Recommendations from previously published AHA/ACC guidelines on thoracic aortic disease, peripheral artery disease, and bicuspid aortic valve disease have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with aortic disease have been developed. There is added emphasis on the role of shared decision making, especially in the management of patients with aortic disease both before and during pregnancy. The is also an increased emphasis on the importance of institutional interventional volume and multidisciplinary aortic team expertise in the care of patients with aortic disease.

Survival and Causes of Death Among Veterans With Lower Extremity Revascularization With Paclitaxel-Coated Devices: Insights From the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND The long-term safety of paclitaxel-coated devices (PCDs; drug-coated balloon or drug-eluting stent) for peripheral endovascular intervention is uncertain. We used data from the Veterans Health Administration to evaluate the association between PCDs, long-term mortality, and cause of death. METHODS AND RESULTS Using the Veterans Administration Corporate Data Warehouse in conjunction with International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) Procedure Coding System, Current Procedural Terminology, and Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System codes, we identified patients with peripheral artery disease treated within the Veterans Administration for femoropopliteal artery revascularization between October 1, 2015, and June 30, 2019. An adjusted Cox regression, using stabilized inverse probability-weighted estimates, was used to evaluate the association between PCDs and long-term survival. Cause of death data were obtained using the National Death Index. In total, 10 505 patients underwent femoropopliteal peripheral endovascular intervention; 2265 (21.6%) with a PCD and 8240 (78.4%) with a non-PCD (percutaneous angioplasty balloon and/or bare metal stent). Survival rates at 2 years (77.4% versus 79.7%) and 3 years (70.7% versus 71.8%) were similar between PCD and non-PCD groups, respectively. The adjusted hazard for all-cause mortality for patients treated with a PCD versus non-PCD was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.95-1.18, P=0.3013). Among patients who died between October 1, 2015, and December 31, 2017, the cause of death according to treatment group, PCD versus non-PCD, was similar. CONCLUSIONS Among patients undergoing femoropopliteal peripheral endovascular intervention within the Veterans Administration Health Administration, there was no increased risk of long-term, all-cause mortality associated with PCD use. Cause-specific mortality rates were similar between treatment groups.

The impact of chronic kidney disease on outcomes following peripheral vascular intervention.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have worsened clinical outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention; however, limited evidence exists in patients undergoing peripheral vascular intervention (PVI). PURPOSE: We aimed to assess the effect of CKD on outcomes following PVI for symptomatic peripheral artery disease. METHODS: Using patients from the LIBERTY 360 study, we compared the rates of 30 day and 1 year major adverse vascular events (MAVE), a composite of all-cause mortality, major amputation, and target vessel/lesion revascularization, between patients with and without CKD (estimated glomular filtration rate less than 60) following PVI. Multivariable adjustment was performed to assess for independent association between CKD and outcomes. RESULTS: Among 1189 patients enrolled, 378 patients (31.8%) had CKD. At 1 year, patients with CKD had higher rates of MAVE (34.6% vs 25.6%), all-cause mortality (11.9% vs 5.5%), and major amputation (5.9% vs 2.6%) when compared with patients without CKD (all P < .05). After adjustment, patients with CKD had higher risks of 1-year MAVE (HR 1.30, 95% CI 1.04-1.64; P = .023) and all-cause mortality (HR 1.88, 95% CI 1.22-2.91; P = .005) when compared with patients without CKD. There was no statistically significant difference in risk of major amputations (HR 1.70, 95% CI 0.91-3.17; P = .094). CONCLUSIONS: Despite high procedural success and low amputation rates, patients with CKD remain at greater risk for MAVE and all-cause mortality after PVI. Further research is needed to determine treatment strategies to mitigate substantial mortality risk in this vulnerable population.