RESUMO
AIMS: Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are increasingly implanted in patients with advanced heart failure. Currently, LVAD care is predominantly concentrated at specialized tertiary care hospitals. The increasing workload and logistical burden for implanting centers poses significant challenges to access to care for individual patients in remote areas. An emerging approach to LVAD patient management is the use of a shared care model (SCM), which allows implanting centers to collaborate with local non-implanting hospitals. This scoping review explores and synthesizes the current scientific evidence on the use of an SCM in LVAD care management. METHODS: Eligible studies were identified in EMBASE, Pubmed MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Google Scholar. The PRISMA-ScR method was used to systematically synthesize findings. RESULTS: Of the 950 records screened, five articles met the inclusion criteria. Four review articles focused on the proposed benefits and challenges of using an SCM. Main benefits included improved patient satisfaction and continuity of care. Important challenges were initial education of non-implanting center staff and maintaining competency. One prospective study showed that absence of LVAD-specific care was associated with impaired survival and higher rates of pump thrombosis and LVAD-related infections. CONCLUSIONS: The use of an SCM is a promising approach in the long-term management of LVAD patients. However, sufficient evidence about the impact of an SCM on patients and the healthcare system is currently lacking. Standardized protocols based on prospective studies are needed to develop safe and effective shared care for LVAD patients.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Mortality rates in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMICS) remain high despite advancements in AMI care. Our study aimed to investigate the impact of prehospital symptom duration on the prognosis of AMICS patients and those receiving mechanical circulatory support (MCS). METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study with data registered in the Netherlands Heart Registration. A total of 1,363 patients with AMICS who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention between 2017 and 2021 were included. Patients presenting after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest were excluded. Most patients were male (68%), with a median age of 69 years (IQR 61-77), predominantly presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (86%). The overall 30-day mortality was 32%. Longer prehospital symptom duration was associated with a higher 30-day mortality with the following rates: <â¯3â¯h, 26%; 3-6â¯h, 29%; 6-24â¯h, 36%; ≥â¯24â¯h, 46%; pâ¯< 0.001. In a subpopulation of AMICS patients with MCS (nâ¯= 332, 24%), symptom duration of >â¯24â¯h was associated with significantly higher mortality compared to symptom duration of <â¯24â¯h (59% vs 45%, pâ¯= 0.029). Multivariate analysis identified >â¯24â¯h symptom duration, age and in-hospital cardiac arrest as predictors of 30-day mortality in MCS patients. CONCLUSION: Prolonged prehospital symptom duration was associated with significantly increased 30-day mortality in patients presenting with AMICS. In AMICS patients treated with MCS, a symptom duration of >â¯24â¯h was an independent predictor of poor survival. These results emphasise the critical role of early recognition and intervention in the prognosis of AMICS patients.
RESUMO
Background: Prospective, trial-based data comparing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients surviving out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) through extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) or conventional CPR (CCPR) are scarce. We aimed to determine HRQoL during 1-year after refractory OHCA in patients treated with ECPR and CCPR. Methods: We present a secondary analysis of the multicenter INCEPTION-trial, which studied the effectiveness of ECPR versus CCPR in patients with refractory OHCA. HRQoL was prospectively assessed using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire. Poor HRQoL was pragmatically defined as an EQ-5D-5L health utility index (HUI) > 1 SD below the age-adjusted norm. We used mixed linear models to assess the difference in HRQoL over time and univariable analyses to assess factors potentially associated with poor HRQoL. Results: A total of 134 patients were enrolled, and hospital survival was 20% (27 patients). EQ-5D-5L data were available for 25 patients (5 ECPR and 20 CCPR). One year after OHCA, the estimated mean HUI was 0.73 (0.05) in all patients, 0.84 (0.12) in ECPR survivors, and 0.71 (0.05) in CCPR survivors (p-value 0.31). Eight (32%) survivors had a poor HRQoL. HRQoL was good in 17 (68%) patients, with 100% in ECPR survivors versus 60% in CCPR survivors (p-value 0.14). Conclusion: One year after refractory OHCA, 68% of the survivors had a good HRQoL. We found no statistically significant difference in HRQoL one year after OHCA in patients treated with ECPR compared to CCPR. However, numerical differences may be clinically relevant in favor of ECPR.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: While experimental data suggest that selective intracoronary hypothermia decreases infarct size, studies in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) are lacking. AIMS: We investigated the efficacy of selective intracoronary hypothermia during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to decrease infarct size in patients with STEMI. METHODS: In this multicentre randomised controlled trial, 200 patients with large anterior wall STEMI were randomised 1:1 to selective intracoronary hypothermia during primary PCI or primary PCI alone. Using an over-the-wire balloon catheter for infusion of cold saline and a pressure-temperature wire to monitor the intracoronary temperature, the anterior myocardium distal to the occlusion was selectively cooled to 30-33°C for 7-10 minutes before reperfusion (occlusion phase), immediately followed by 10 minutes of cooling after reperfusion (reperfusion phase). The primary endpoint was infarct size as a percentage of left ventricular mass on cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging after 3 months. RESULTS: Selective intracoronary hypothermia was performed in 94/100 patients randomised to cooling. Distal coronary temperature decreased by 6°C within 43 seconds (interquartile range [IQR] 18-113). The median duration of the occlusion phase and reperfusion phase were 8.2 minutes (IQR 7.2-9.0) and 9.1 minutes (IQR 8.2-10.0), respectively. The infarct size at 3 months was 23.1±12.5% in the selective intracoronary hypothermia group and 21.6±12.2% in the primary PCI alone group (p=0.43). The left ventricular ejection fraction at 3 months in each group were 49.1±10.2% and 50.1±10.4%, respectively (p=0.53). CONCLUSIONS: Selective intracoronary hypothermia during primary PCI in patients with anterior wall STEMI was feasible and safe but did not decrease infarct size compared with standard primary PCI. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03447834).
Assuntos
Hipotermia Induzida , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST , Humanos , Masculino , Hipotermia Induzida/métodos , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/métodos , Idoso , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/terapia , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/fisiopatologia , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/diagnóstico por imagem , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/cirurgia , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
Introduction: Extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) is increasingly used as a supportive treatment for refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Still, there is a paucity of data evaluating favorable and unfavorable prognostic characteristics in patients considered for ECPR. Methods: We performed a previously unplanned post-hoc analysis of the multicenter randomized controlled INCEPTION-trial. The study group consisted of patients receiving ECPR, irrespective of initial group randomization. The patients were divided into favorable survivors (cerebral performance category [CPC] 1-2) and unfavorable or non-survivors (CPC 3-5). Results: In the initial INCEPTION-trial, 134 patients were randomized. ECPR treatment was started in 46 (66%) of 70 patients in the ECPR treatment arm and 3 (4%) of 74 patients in the conventional treatment arm. No statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics, medical history, or causes of arrest were observed between survivors (n = 5) and non-survivors (n = 44). More patients in the surviving group had a shockable rhythm at the time of cannulation (60% vs. 14%, p = 0.037), underwent more defibrillation attempts (13 vs. 6, p = 0.002), and received higher dosages of amiodarone (450 mg vs 375 mg, p = 0.047) despite similar durations of resuscitation maneuvers. Furthermore, non-survivors more frequently had post-ECPR implantation adverse events. Conclusion: The persistence of ventricular arrhythmia is a favorable prognostic factor in patients with refractory OHCA undergoing an ECPR-based treatment. Future studies are warranted to confirm this finding and to establish additional prognostic factors.Clinical trial Registration:clinicaltrials.gov registration number NCT03101787.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate clinical outcomes in patients developing post-operative atrial fibrillation (POAF) after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and characterize variations in oral anticoagulation (OAC) use, benefits, and complications. METHODS: A systematic search identified studies on new-onset POAF after CABG and OAC initiation. Outcomes included risks of thromboembolic events, bleeding, and mortality. Furthermore, a meta-analysis was conducted on these outcomes, stratified by the use or non-use of OAC. RESULTS: The identified studies were all non-randomized. Among 1 698 307 CABG patients, POAF incidence ranged from 7.9% to 37.6%. Of all POAF patients, 15.5% received OAC. Within 30 days, thromboembolic events occurred at rates of 1.0% (POAF: 0.3%; non-POAF: 0.8%) with 2.0% mortality (POAF: 1.0%; non-POAF: 0.5%). Bleeding rates were 1.1% for POAF patients and 2.7% for non-POAF patients. Over a median of 4.6 years, POAF patients had 1.73 thromboembolic events, 3.39 mortality, and 2.00 bleeding events per 100 person-years; non-POAF patients had 1.14, 2.19, and 1.60, respectively. No significant differences in thromboembolic risks [effect size -0.11 (-0.36 to 0.13)] and mortality [effect size -0.07 (-0.21 to 0.07)] were observed between OAC users and non-users. However, OAC use was associated with higher bleeding risk [effect size 0.32 (0.06-0.58)]. CONCLUSIONS: In multiple timeframes following CABG, the incidence of complications in patients who develop POAF is low. The use of OAC in patients with POAF after CABG is associated with increased bleeding risk.