Race and outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Cardiovascular Consortium.

BACKGROUND: Current studies show similar in-hospital outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between Black and White patients. Long-term outcomes and the role of individual and community-level socioeconomic factors in differential risk are less understood. METHODS: We linked clinical registry data from PCIs performed between January, 2013 and March, 2018 at 48 Michigan hospitals to Medicare Fee-for-service claims. We analyzed patients of Black and White race. We used propensity score matching and logistic regression models to estimate the odds of 90-day readmission and Cox regression to evaluate the risk of postdischarge mortality. We used mediation analysis to evaluate the proportion of association mediated by socioeconomic factors. RESULTS: Of the 29,317 patients included in this study, 10.28% were Black and 89.72% were White. There were minimal differences between groups regarding post-PCI in-hospital outcomes. Compared with White patients, Black patients were more likely to be readmitted within 90-days of discharge (adjusted OR 1.62, 95% CI [1.32-2.00]) and had significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.30-1.61) when adjusting for age and gender. These associations were significantly mediated by dual eligibility (proportion mediated [PM] for readmission: 11.0%; mortality: 21.1%); dual eligibility and economic well-being of the patient's community (PM for readmission: 22.3%; mortality: 43.0%); and dual eligibility, economic well-being of the community, and baseline clinical characteristics (PM for readmission: 45.0%; mortality: 87.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Black patients had a higher risk of 90-day readmission and cumulative mortality following PCI compared with White patients. Associations were mediated by dual eligibility, community economic well-being, and traditional cardiovascular risk factors. Our study highlights the need for improved upstream care and streamlined postdischarge care pathways as potential strategies to improve health care disparities in cardiovascular disease.

Improved outcomes in patients with severely depressed LVEF undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with contemporary practices.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary practices for hemodynamically supported high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention have evolved over the last decade. This study sought to compare outcomes of the prospective, multicenter, PROTECT III study to historic patients treated with Impella in the PROTECT II randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Of 1,134 patients enrolled in PROTECT III from March 2017 to March 2020, 504 were "PROTECT II-like" (met eligibility for PROTECT II randomized controlled trial) and are referred to as PROTECT III for comparative analysis. Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), comprising all-cause mortality, stroke/transient ischemic attack, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization, were compared at hospital discharge and 90 days. RESULTS: Compared with PROTECT II (N = 216), PROTECT III patients were less often Caucasian (77.1% vs 83.8%, P = .045), with less prior CABG (13.7% vs 39.4%; P < .001) and prior myocardial infarction (40.7% vs 69.3%; P < .001). More PROTECT III patients underwent rotational atherectomy (37.1% vs 14.8%, P < .001) and duration of support was longer (median 1.6 vs 1.3 hours; p<0.001), with greater improvement achieved in myocardial ischemia jeopardy scores (7.0±2.4 vs 4.4±2.9; P < .001) and SYNTAX scores (21.4±10.8 vs 15.7±9.5; P < .001). In-hospital bleeding requiring transfusion was significantly lower in PROTECT III (1.8% vs 9.3%; P < .001), as was procedural hypotension (2.2% vs 10.1%; P < .001) and cardiopulmonary resuscitation or ventricular arrhythmia (1.6% vs 6.9%; P < .001). At 90 days, MACCE was 15.1% and 21.9% in PROTECT III and PROTECT II, respectively (p=0.037). Following propensity score matching, Kaplan-Meier analysis showed improved 90-day MACCE rates in PROTECT III (10.4% vs 16.9%, P = .048). CONCLUSIONS: The PROTECT III study demonstrates improved completeness of revascularization, less bleeding, and improved 90-day clinical outcomes compared to PROTECT II for Impella-supported high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention among patients with severely depressed LVEF.

Identifying opportunities to advance health equity in interventional cardiology: Structural heart disease.

Health care practices are influenced by variety of factors. These factors that include social determinants, race and ethnicity, and gender not only affect access to health care but can also affect quality of care and patient outcomes. These are a source of health care disparities. This article acknowledges that these disparities exist in getting optimal care in structural heart disease, reviews the literature and proposes steps that can help reduce these disparities on personal and committee levels.

Clinical features and outcomes in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction: early vs recent experience with impella.

OBJECTIVES: To compare clinical features and outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMICS) treated in the early experience with Impella percutaneous ventricular assist device and patients treated recently. BACKGROUND: Since pre-market approval (PMA) of Impella device as treatment for AMICS, use of the device has grown considerably. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 649 AMICS patients treated with perioperative Impella, with 291 patients treated from 2008 to 2014 comprising the early experience cohort and 358 patients treated from 2017 to 2019 comprising the recent experience cohort. The primary end point was risk adjusted in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Mean age and gender distribution of patients was similar in the two cohorts. The recent cohort had more invasive hemodynamic monitoring (64% vs 46%; P < .001) and less use of an intra-aortic balloon pump prior to Impella (15% vs 41%; P < .001). Recently treated patients were significantly more likely to receive Impella support prior to PCI (58% vs 44%; P = .005). In-hospital mortality was lower in the recent cohort (48% vs 56%; P = .043). This difference was however no longer significant after risk adjustment (adjusted OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.59-1.34, P = .59). Rates of acute kidney injury, major bleeding, and vascular complications requiring surgery were also significantly lower in the recent cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Use of Impella for AMICS during recent years is associated with lower unadjusted in-hospital mortality, which may reflect better patient selection, earlier device implantation, and improved management algorithms. In-depth understanding of these factors may inform the development of future treatment protocols.

Outcomes of bailout percutaneous ventricular assist device versus prophylactic strategy in patients undergoing nonemergent percutaneous coronary intervention.

OBJECTIVES: To compare in-hospital outcomes of bailout support to prophylactic support with percutaneous ventricular assist devices (pVAD) for high-risk nonemergent percutaneous coronary intervention (HRPCI). BACKGROUND: Prophylactic support with pVAD for a HRPCI is used in patients felt to be at risk for hemodynamic collapse during PCI. An alternative strategy of bailout pVAD support in the event of hemodynamic collapse is also entertained. METHODS: We compared the outcomes of patients entered in the cVAD database who underwent Impella Protected PCI (ProPCI group) with patients from the cVAD and USpella databases receiving bailout Impella support for hemodynamic collapse during HRPCI (Bailout group). RESULTS: A total of 1,028 patients supported with Impella pVAD were entered into the cVAD database as of July 2019 and were included in this analysis. Of those 971 were in the ProPCI group and 57 in the Bailout group. Patients in the Bailout group were more often female (50.9%vs. 27.2%, p = .0002) with higher median baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (40%vs. 30%, p < .0001) and with lower prevalence of both heart failure (42.1%vs. 56.9%, p = .0385) and left main disease (40.0%vs. 56.1%, p = .0250) compared to the ProPCI group. Unadjusted and adjusted in-hospital mortality was significantly higher in the Bailout group (49.1%vs. 4.3%, and 57.8%vs. 4.4%, p < .0001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: In our study population, the bailout group was associated with significant increased mortality compared to ProPCI group. Female gender was more frequently observed in patients requiring bailout pVAD. Further investigation is warranted in order to generalize the findings of our study.

Unloading the Left Ventricle Before Reperfusion in Patients With Anterior ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: In ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), infarct size correlates directly with heart failure and mortality. Preclinical testing has shown that, in comparison with reperfusion alone, mechanically unloading the left ventricle (LV) before reperfusion reduces infarct size and that 30 minutes of unloading activates a cardioprotective program that limits reperfusion injury. The DTU-STEMI pilot trial (Door-To-Unload in STEMI Pilot Trial) represents the first exploratory study testing whether LV unloading and delayed reperfusion in patients with STEMI without cardiogenic shock is safe and feasible. METHODS: In a multicenter, prospective, randomized exploratory safety and feasibility trial, we assigned 50 patients with anterior STEMI to LV unloading by using the Impella CP followed by immediate reperfusion (U-IR) versus delayed reperfusion after 30 minutes of unloading (U-DR). The primary safety outcome was a composite of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events at 30 days. Efficacy parameters included the assessment of infarct size by using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: All patients completed the U-IR (n=25) or U-DR (n=25) protocols with respective mean door-to-balloon times of 72 versus 97 minutes. Major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular event rates were not statistically different between the U-IR versus U-DR groups (8% versus 12%, respectively, P=0.99). In comparison with the U-IR group, delaying reperfusion in the U-DR group did not affect 30-day mean infarct size measured as a percentage of LV mass (15±12% versus 13±11%, U-IR versus U-DR, P=0.53). CONCLUSIONS: We report that LV unloading using the Impella CP device with a 30-minute delay before reperfusion is feasible within a relatively short time period in anterior STEMI. The DTU-STEMI pilot trial did not identify prohibitive safety signals that would preclude proceeding to a larger pivotal study of LV unloading before reperfusion. An appropriately powered pivotal trial comparing LV unloading before reperfusion to the current standard of care is required. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT03000270.

Impella support and acute kidney injury during high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: The Global cVAD Renal Protection Study.

BACKGROUND: Protection against acute kidney injury (AKI) has been reported with the use of Impella during high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (HR-PCI). We sought to evaluate this finding by determining the occurrence of AKI during Impella-supported HR-PCI in patients from the Global cVAD Study and compare this incidence with their calculated AKI risk at baseline. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this prospective, multicenter study, we enrolled 314 consecutive patients. We included 223 patients that underwent nonemergent HR-PCI supported with Impella 2.5 or Impella CP and excluded those requiring hemodialysis prior to HR-PCI (19) and those with insufficient data (72). The primary outcome was AKI postprocedurally at 48 hr versus the predicted risk of AKI according to Mehran risk score. Logistic regression analysis determined predictors of AKI. Overall, 4.9% (11) of Impella-supported patients developed AKI (exclusively stage 1) at 48 hr versus a predicted rate of 21.9%, representing a 77.6% lower AKI rate (p < .0001). In this study, no Impella-supported patients required renal replacement therapy. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (ml/min/1.73 m2 ) alone predicted AKI (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 4.915; 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 1.02-23.53, p = .046), and increasing contrast had insignificant effects on AKI during high-risk PCI (AOR: 1.15; 95% CI: 0.87-1.51, p = .332). In patients not protected from AKI, the postprocedure incidence of AKI was not significantly greater and did not correlate with chronic kidney disease severity. CONCLUSION: The incidence of AKI was lower during HR-PCI than expected from current risk models. Although further exploration of this finding is warranted, these data support a new protective strategy against AKI during HR-PCI.

Sex-related difference in the use of percutaneous left ventricular assist device in patients undergoing complex high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: Insight from the cVAD registry.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the in-hospital and short-term outcome differences between males and females who underwent high-risk PCI with mechanical circulatory support (MCS). BACKGROUND: Sex differences have been noted in several percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) series with females less likely to be referred for PCI due increased risk of adverse events. However, data on sex differences in utilization and outcomes of high-risk PCI with MCS is scarce. METHODS: Using the cVAD Registry, we identified 1,053 high-risk patients who underwent PCI with MCS using Impella 2.5 or Impella CP. Patients with cardiogenic shock were excluded. A total of 792 (75.21%) males and 261 (24.79%) females were included in the analysis with median follow-up of 81.5 days. RESULTS: Females were more likely to be African American, older (72.05 ± 11.66 vs. 68.87 ± 11.17, p < .001), have a higher prevalence of diabetes (59.30 vs. 49.04%, p = .005), renal insufficiency (35.41 vs. 27.39%, p = .018), and peripheral vascular disease (31.89 vs. 25.39%, p of .05). Women had a higher mean STS score (8.21 ± 8.21 vs. 5.04 ± 5.97, p < .001) and lower cardiac output on presentation (3.64 ± 1.30 vs. 4.63 ± 1.49, p < .001). Although women had more comorbidities, there was no difference in in-hospital mortality, stroke, MI or need for recurrent revascularization compared to males. Females were more likely to have multivessel revascularization than males. Ejection fraction improved in both males and females at the time of discharge (26.59 to 31.40% and 30.75 to 36.05%, respectively, p < .0001). However, females had higher rate of bleeding requiring transfusion compared with males (9.58 vs. 5.30%, p = .019). CONCLUSION: Female patients undergoing high PCI were older and had more comorbidities but had similar outcomes compared to males.

Large bore occlusive sheath management.

The field of interventional cardiology has evolved in its ability to carry out complex procedures. Procedures such as transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), and mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices require large bore access for successful deployment. With the use of large bore-access, comes with it an increased risk for vascular complications, such as thrombosis and limb ischemia. It is paramount for the interventional cardiologist to know how to manage such complications. In this manuscript, we describe our strategies for the management of occlusive sheaths increasingly encountered with large bore accesses in the upper and lower extremities. Strategies such as peeling away of the introducer sheath and the creation of internal and external bypass circuits are described. By using the described techniques, one can provide prolonged hemodynamic support and maintain large bore sheath access, without jeopardizing perfusion to the extremity.

In-hospital outcomes of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in non-teaching hospitals.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the in-hospital outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) vs. surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in non-teaching hospitals. BACKGROUND: TAVR has become widely available in the United States. However, the comparative outcomes of TAVR vs. SAVR in non-teaching hospitals are largely under explored. METHODS: We queried the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database from 2011 to September 2015 to identify those who were 50 years or above and underwent either trans-arterial TAVR or SAVR at non-teaching hospital. In-hospital clinical outcomes were compared with odds ratio (OR) in propensity-matched cohorts. RESULTS: We identified un-weighted 957 and 7,465 SAVR admissions. In propensity-matched model, 596 admissions in each arm were included for final analysis. In-patient mortality (3.9 vs. 2.5%, OR 1.54, P = 0.34), acute kidney injury requiring dialysis (2.2 vs. 2.7%, OR 0.80, P = 0.57), stroke (2.0 vs. 3.2%, OR 0.61, P = 0.20), and pacemaker placement (8.9 vs. 6.4%, OR 1.47, P = 0.09) was similar between TAVR and SAVR. Sub-group analysis showed that female and those with prior coronary artery bypass surgery had higher risk of in-patient morality in TAVR admission. Cost was higher (59,103 vs. 53,411 dollars, P = 0.006) but length of stay was shorter in TAVR (6.9 vs. 10.2 days, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: TAVR conferred similar in-hospital mortality and major peri-procedural complications compared with SAVR in non-teaching hospitals. For those with limited access to teaching hospitals, non-teaching hospitals appear to be a reasonable option for candidates of aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis.

Improved Outcomes Associated with the use of Shock Protocols: Updates from the National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative.

BACKGROUND: The National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative is a single-arm, prospective, multicenter study to assess outcomes associated with early mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock (AMICS) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: Between July 2016 and February 2019, 35 sites participated and enrolled into the study. All centers agreed to treat patients with AMICS using a standard protocol emphasizing invasive hemodynamic monitoring and rapid initiation of MCS. Inclusion and exclusion criteria mimicked those of the "SHOCK" trial with an additional exclusion criteria of intra-aortic balloon pump counter-pulsation prior to MCS. RESULTS: A total of 171 consecutive patients were enrolled. Patients had an average age of 63 years, 77% were male, and 68% were admitted with AMICS. About 83% of patients were on vasopressors or inotropes, 20% had a witnessed out of hospital cardiac arrest, 29% had in-hospital cardiac arrest, and 10% were under active cardiopulmonary resuscitation during MCS implantation. In accordance with the protocol, 74% of patients had MCS implanted prior to PCI. Right heart catheterization was performed in 92%. About 78% of patients presented with ST-elevation myocardial infarction with average door to support times of 85 ± 63 min and door to balloon times of 87 ± 58 min. Survival to discharge was 72%. Creatinine ≥2, lactate >4, cardiac power output (CPO) <0.6 W, and age ≥ 70 years were predictors of mortality. Lactate and CPO measurements at 12-24 hr reliably predicted overall mortality postindex procedure. CONCLUSION: In contemporary practice, use of a shock protocol emphasizing best practices is associated with improved outcomes.

Nonemergent Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on an Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Supported with Impella® Heart Pump in Patients Ineligible for Surgical Revascularization.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess if ineligibility to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) constitutes a risk factor in patients who underwent a nonemergent unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with prophylactic Impella® heart pump support. BACKGROUND: ULMCA PCI in patients not deemed eligible for CABG is associated with significantly worse outcomes compared to ULMCA PCI in eligible patients. METHODS: Patients from the cVAD Registry and the PROTECT II trial who underwent a nonemergent ULMCA PCI were identified. We compared in-hospital mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) rates as well as 30-day survival and MACCE rates between CABG ineligible and CABG eligible patients. RESULTS: A total of 331 patients were included (293 Impella 2.5®, 38 Impella CP®); 227 were ineligible for CABG and 104 were eligible. Baseline characteristics were remarkable for a trend toward higher rate of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the ineligible patients. In-hospital mortality (3.52% vs. 5.77%; p=0.383) and MACCE (6.61% vs. 7.69%; p=0.816) rates as well as 30-day survival (92.0% vs. 93.4%; Log-Rank p-value =0.781) and MACCE (88.1% vs. 90.1%; Log-Rank p-value=0.648) rates were not different between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study suggest that prophylactic Impella support appears to mitigate the risks inherent to surgical ineligibility in patients undergoing a nonemergent ULMCA PCI. Our results require further investigation.

Catheter-directed therapy for acute pulmonary embolism in children.

BACKGROUND: Acute pulmonary embolism is a life-threatening condition and rarely occurs in children. In adults, catheter-directed therapy emerges as a potentially safer and effective therapeutic option. However, there is a paucity of data on the safety and efficacy of catheter-directed therapy for pulmonary embolism in children. We report a single-centred experience of catheter-directed therapy for acute pulmonary embolism in children. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of children who had no CHD and underwent catheter-directed therapy at Detroit Medical Center during a 12-year period from 2005 to 2017. Demographic and clinical data associated with pulmonary embolism were collected along with the outcome. RESULTS: A total of nine patients of median age 16 years with the range from 12 to 20 received catheter-directed therapy for sub-massive (n = 6) and massive pulmonary embolism (n = 3). Among nine patients, one patient received Angiojet thrombectomy and balloon angioplasty, whereas eight patients received catheter-directed thrombolysis using tissue plasminogen activator through infusion catheters (n = 3) or EkoSonic ultrasound-accelerated thrombolysis system (n = 5). In four out of five patients treated with EkoSonic, significant clinical improvement was noticed within 24 hours. Among seven patients who survived, two patients had minor gastrointestinal bleeding with median hospital stay of 8 days with the range from 5 to 24 days, and two patients with massive pulmonary embolism died possibly due to delayed institution of catheter-directed therapy. CONCLUSION: Catheter-directed therapy with/without EkoSonic is an emerging alternative therapy for sub-massive and massive pulmonary embolism in children. A timely institution of catheter-directed therapy appeared important to improve the outcome.

Analysis of outcomes for 15,259 US patients with acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock (AMICS) supported with the Impella device.

BACKGROUND: The Impella percutaneous ventricular assist device (PVAD) rapidly deploys mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMICS). We present findings from a quality improvement (IQ) registry for US patients with AMICS who received Impella devices. METHODS AND RESULTS: From January 2009 to December 2016, 46,949 patients from 1010US hospitals were entered into the IQ registry; of these, 15,259 had AMICS. Limited de-identified patient information, product performance, and survival to explantation were recorded. Of those with AMICS, 51% survived to explantation of PVAD. There was a significant difference between survival at explantation with quintile volume at hospitals (range: 0-100%; 30% survival rate in lowest quintile vs. 76% in top quintile; P<.0001). Use of the Impella device as first-line treatment pre-PCI was associated with a 59% survival rate, compared with 52% when used as a salvage strategy (P<.001). The survival rate among those who received hemodynamic monitoring with pulmonary artery catheters was 63% as compared with 49% in those who did not (P<.0001). Overall institutional Impella volume was related to survival (56% survival at sites with >7/year vs. 51% at sites with ≤1; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this early clinical experience with Impella support for AMICS, wide variation in outcomes existed across centers. Survival was higher when Impella was used as first support strategy, when invasive hemodynamic monitoring was used, and at centers with higher Impella implantation volume.

The cVAD registry for percutaneous temporary hemodynamic support: A prospective registry of Impella mechanical circulatory support use in high-risk PCI, cardiogenic shock, and decompensated heart failure.

Management of patients requiring temporary, mechanical hemodynamic support during high- risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or in cardiogenic shock is rapidly evolving. With the availability of the Impella 2.5, CP, 5.0, LD, and RP percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices, there is a need for continued surveillance of outcomes. Three factors underline the importance of a registry for these populations. First, large randomized trials of hemodynamic support, involving cardiogenic shock, are challenging to conduct. Second, there is increasing interest in the use of registries to provide "real-world" experience and to allow the flexibility to evaluate individual patient uses and outcomes. Third, current, large databases have not captured the specific impact of mechanical support treatment of cardiogenic shock. The predecessor to the catheter-based ventricular assist devices registry, known as USpella, began in 2009 with paper data acquisition but beginning in 2011 transferred to electronic data capture, enrolling 3,339 patients through 2016. Throughout, registry data have been used to assess the outcomes of Impella therapy, leading to 8 publications and 4 Food and Drug Administration premarket approvals covering multiple indications and Impella devices. Going forward, the registry will continue to assess not only in-hospital outcomes but long-term follow-up to 1 year. In addition, data management will be enhanced to assess quality and clinical experiences. The registry will also provide a mechanism for postmarketing surveillance. This manuscript reviews the ongoing catheter-based ventricular assist devices registry design, management, and contributions of the registry data. The upgraded registry will provide a more robust opportunity to assess acute and late outcomes of current and future device use worldwide. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: The current catheter-based ventricular assist devices registry is an international database documenting outcomes with temporary Impella hemodynamic support. The registry has supported 8 publications and 4 Food and Drug Administration premarket approvals since its inception in 2009. The current registry is more robust containing outcomes up to 1 year postprocedure.

The Impella Microaxial Flow Catheter Is Safe and Effective for Treatment of Myocarditis Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock: An Analysis From the Global cVAD Registry.

BACKGROUND: Myocarditis complicated by cardiogenic shock remains a complex problem. The use of acute mechanical circulatory support devices for cardiogenic shock is growing. We explored the utility of Impella transvalvular microaxial flow catheters in the setting of myocarditis with cardiogenic shock. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively analyzed data from 21 sites within the cVAD registry, an ongoing multicenter voluntary registry at sites in North America and Europe that have used Impella in patients with myocarditis. Myocarditis was defined by endomyocardial biopsy (n = 11) or by clinical history without angiographic evidence of coronary disease (n = 23). A total of 34 patients received an Impella 2.5, CP, 5.0, or RP device for cardiogenic shock complicating myocarditis. Baseline characteristics included age 42 ± 17 years, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 18% ± 10%, cardiac index 1.82 ± 0.46 L·min-1·m-2, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure 25 ± 7 mm Hg, and lactate 27 ± 31 mg/dL. Before Impella placement, 32% (n = 11) of patients required intra-aortic balloon pump. Mean duration of Impella support was 91 ± 74 hours; 21 of 34 patients (62%) survived the index hospitalization and were discharged with an improved mean LVEF of 37.32% ± 20.31% (P = .001); 15 patients recovered with successful support, 5 patients were transferred to another hospital on initial Impella support, 1 patient underwent orthotopic heart transplantation. Ten patients required transition to another mechanical circulatory support device. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest analysis of Impella-supported myocarditis cases to date. The use of Impella appears to be safe and effective in the settings of myocarditis complicated by cardiogenic shock.

Feasibility of coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention after transcatheter aortic valve replacement using a Medtronic™ self-expandable bioprosthetic valve.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: With aging, the progression of atherosclerosis in the coronary arteries is expected. The Medtronic™ self-expandable aortic bioprosthetic valve is deployed in the supra-annular position, and it has been challenging to selectively engage coronary arteries post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) even though there are diamond-shaped spaces in the mesh frame within the valve. Given the scarcity of data, we analyzed angiographic and clinical data from all patients requiring coronary angiography (CA) or intervention post-TAVR. METHODS: From January 2012 to December 2016, 403 patients were treated for severe aortic stenosis with TAVR at our center using the Medtronic™ self-expandable valve. This study included patients who underwent CA with or without percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) after TAVR. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients underwent 43 CAs after TAVR at our institution. Eleven patients (39%) were women. More than 90% of the procedures were performed for acute coronary syndrome. Thirty-six cases were performed using the transfemoral approach (83%). Forty-two of 43 (97%) left coronary arteries were selectively engaged, and 29 of 32 (90%) right coronary arteries were selectively engaged. We were able to engage 11 saphenous vein grafts and two left internal mammary artery grafts selectively (100%). The mean fluoroscopy time for diagnostic CA was 11.5 min, and for PCI, instantaneous wave-free ratio, or intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) interrogation, it was 19 minutes. The mean amount of contrast used for diagnostic CA was 102 cc per case, and for PCI, iFR, or IVUS, it was 146 cc per case. No periprocedural complication was noted. CONCLUSIONS: CA with or without PCI after TAVR is feasible with supra-annular self-expandable valves. With the proper technique in experienced hands, it can be conducted safely.

A systematic review of reported cases of combined transcatheter aortic and mitral valve interventions.

OBJECTIVES: To summarize the published data of combined transcatheter aortic and mitral valve intervention (CTAMVI). BACKGROUND: CTAMVI, a combination of either transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve (TAViV) and transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR), transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve/valve-in-ring (TMViV/ViR), or percutaneous mitral valve repair (PMVR) is an attractive alternative in high-surgical risk patients with combined aortic and mitral valve disease. However, its procedural details and clinical outcomes have not been well described. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of all the published articles from PUBMED and EMBASE. RESULTS: A total of 37 studies with 60 patients were included. The indication for CTAMVI was high or inoperable surgical risk and symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (92%) or severe aortic regurgitation (8%) combined with moderate to severe/severe mitral stenosis (30%) or moderate/severe mitral regurgitation (65%) or both (5%). In majority of the cases, aortic valve intervention was performed prior to the mitral valve. Mortality rate were 25% for TAVR + TMVR (range 42 days to 10 months), 17% for TAVR + TMViV/ViR (range 13 days to 6 months), 0% for TAViV + TMViV/ViR (range 6-365 days), and 15% for TAVR/ViV + PMVR (range 17 days to 419 days). Significant (more than moderate) paravalvular regurgitation post-procedure was rare. CONCLUSIONS: CTAMVI appears to confer reasonable clinical outcome. Further large study is warranted to clarify the optimal strategy, procedural details and clinical outcomes in the future.

Hospital outcomes of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in female in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the in-hospital mortality and complications in female between transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). BACKGROUND: Female is one of the risk factors for increased adverse events in cardiac surgery. METHODS AND RESULTS: Nationwide Inpatient Sample database was queried from 2011 to 2014 for patients who underwent TAVR or SAVR in female patients. The primary endpoint was in-hospital all-cause mortality and second endpoints were perioperative complications. We performed a propensity score analysis to calculate the adjusted odds ratio (OR) for each outcome. Patients who had concomitant cardiac surgery and those who had TAVR or SAVR mainly for aortic regurgitation were excluded. Our query from 2011 to 2014 resulted in a total of 3,067 TAVR and 18,594 SAVR in female patients. TAVR patients were in general elder and had a higher burden of comorbidities. The primary endpoint was similar between TAVR and SAVR (4.2% vs. 3.9%, OR 1.0, P = 0.89). Compared to SAVR, female TAVR patients had less hemorrhage requiring transfusion (12% vs. 21%, OR 0.41, P < 0.001), perioperative cardiac arrest and nonfatal myocardial infarction (9.8% vs. 17%, OR 0.38, P < 0.001), respiratory complication (1.6% vs. 4.4%, OR 0.28, P < 0.001), post-op sepsis (1.7% vs. 2.9%, OR 0.65, P = 0.03), acute myocardial infarction (3.0% vs. 4.9%, OR 0.60, P < 0.001), and acute kidney injury (15% vs. 18%, OR 0.62, P < 0.001). Conversely, female TAVR patients had significantly increased risk of new pacemaker implantation (11% vs. 5.9%, OR 1.7, P < 0.001) and use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (0.66% vs. 0.24%, OR 2.8, P < 0.001). TAVR patients had less nonroutine discharge. The median hospital cost was significantly higher in TAVR than SAVR (median $51,274 vs. $43,677, P < 0.001) but the length of stay was shorter (mean 7.8 days vs. 10.5 days). CONCLUSIONS: TAVR may be a better option for those patients with underlying comorbidities that predispose them at higher risk for complications that was less observed in TAVR group. However, higher cost and increased risk of need for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, although rare, should be taken into consideration upon deciding the optimal mode for aortic valve replacement.

Feasibility of early mechanical circulatory support in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: The Detroit cardiogenic shock initiative.

OBJECTIVE: The 'Detroit Cardiogenic Shock Initiative' is a single-arm, multicenter study to assess the feasibility of early mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients who present with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMICS) who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: Between July 2016 and February 2017, 4 metro Detroit sites participated in the study. The centers agreed to treat patients with AMICS using a mutually agreed-upon protocol emphasizing invasive hemodynamic monitoring and rapid initiation of MCS. Inclusion and exclusion criteria mimicked those from the 'SHOCK' trial with an additional exclusion criteria being use of intra-aortic balloon pump counter pulsation prior to MCS. RESULTS: A total of 41 consecutive patients were included. Patients had an average age of 65 ± 14 years, 71% were male and 59% of patients were admitted to the hospital in cardiogenic shock. Prior to receiving MCS, 93% of patients were on vasopressors or inotropes, 15% of patients had a witnessed out of hospital cardiac arrest, 27% of patients had an in-hospital cardiac arrest, and 17% were under active cardiopulmonary resuscitation while MCS was being implanted. In accordance to the protocol recommendation, 66% of patients had a MCS device inserted prior to PCI. Right heart catheterization and hemodynamic monitoring was performed in 83% of patients. Door to support times averaged 83 ± 58 minutes and 71% of patients were able to reduce the levels of inotropes and vasopressors within the first 24-hours of their index procedure. Pre-procedure cardiac power output (CPO) was 0.57 W and post-procedure CPO was 0.95 W, a 67% increase (p < 0.001). Survival to explant for the entire cohort was 85% a significant improvement from institutional historical controls (85% vs 51% p < 0.001) and survival to discharge was 76%. CONCLUSION: Centers who adopted a regional shock protocol emphasizing the delivery of early MCS with invasive hemodynamic monitoring can achieve rapid door to support times and can improve survival in patients who present with AMICS. Larger national studies will be needed to further validate this pilot feasibility study.