Cardiovascular Management of Patients Undergoing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: From Pretransplantation to Survivorship: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation can cure various disorders but poses cardiovascular risks, especially for elderly patients and those with cardiovascular diseases. Cardiovascular evaluations are crucial in pretransplantation assessments, but guidelines are lacking. This American Heart Association scientific statement summarizes the data on transplantation-related complications and provides guidance for the cardiovascular management throughout transplantation. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation consists of 4 phases: pretransplantation workup, conditioning therapy and infusion, immediate posttransplantation period, and long-term survivorship. Complications can occur during each phase, with long-term survivors facing increased risks for late effects such as cardiovascular disease, secondary malignancies, and endocrinopathies. In adults, arrhythmias such as atrial fibrillation and flutter are the most frequent acute cardiovascular complication. Acute heart failure has an incidence ranging from 0.4% to 2.2%. In pediatric patients, left ventricular systolic dysfunction and pericardial effusion are the most common cardiovascular complications. Factors influencing the incidence and risk of complications include pretransplantation therapies, transplantation type (autologous versus allogeneic), conditioning regimen, comorbid conditions, and patient age. The pretransplantation cardiovascular evaluation consists of 4 steps: (1) initial risk stratification, (2) exclusion of high-risk cardiovascular disease, (3) assessment of cardiac reserve, and (4) optimization of cardiovascular reserve. Clinical risk scores could be useful tools for the risk stratification of adult patients. Long-term cardiovascular management of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation survivors includes optimizing risk factors, monitoring, and maintaining a low threshold for evaluating cardiovascular causes of symptoms. Future research should prioritize refining risk stratification and creating evidence-based guidelines and strategies to optimize outcomes in this growing patient population.

Monocyte-Mediated Thrombosis Linked to Circulating Tissue Factor and Immune Paralysis in COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: SARS-CoV-2 infections cause COVID-19 and are associated with inflammation, coagulopathy, and high incidence of thrombosis. Myeloid cells help coordinate the initial immune response in COVID-19. Although we appreciate that myeloid cells lie at the nexus of inflammation and thrombosis, the mechanisms that unite the two in COVID-19 remain largely unknown. METHODS: In this study, we used systems biology approaches including proteomics, transcriptomics, and mass cytometry to define the circulating proteome and circulating immune cell phenotypes in subjects with COVID-19. RESULTS: In a cohort of subjects with COVID-19 (n=35), circulating markers of inflammation (CCL23 [C-C motif chemokine ligand 23] and IL [interleukin]-6) and vascular dysfunction (ACE2 [angiotensin-converting enzyme 2] and TF [tissue factor]) were elevated in subjects with severe compared with mild COVID-19. Additionally, although the total white blood cell counts were similar between COVID-19 groups, CD14+ (cluster of differentiation) monocytes from subjects with severe COVID-19 expressed more TF. At baseline, transcriptomics demonstrated increased IL-6, CCL3, ACOD1 (aconitate decarboxylase 1), C5AR1 (complement component 5a receptor), C5AR2, and TF in subjects with severe COVID-19 compared with controls. Using stress transcriptomics, we found that circulating immune cells from subjects with severe COVID-19 had evidence of profound immune paralysis with greatly reduced transcriptional activation and release of inflammatory markers in response to TLR (Toll-like receptor) activation. Finally, sera from subjects with severe (but not mild) COVID-19 activated human monocytes and induced TF expression. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, these observations further elucidate the pathological mechanisms that underlie immune dysfunction and coagulation abnormalities in COVID-19, contributing to our growing understanding of SARS-CoV-2 infections that could also be leveraged to develop novel diagnostic and therapeutic strategies.

Cardiomuscular Biomarkers in the Diagnosis and Prognostication of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Myocarditis.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are approved for multiple cancers but can result in ICI-associated myocarditis, an infrequent but life-threatening condition. Elevations in cardiac biomarkers, specifically troponin-I (cTnI), troponin-T (cTnT), and creatine kinase (CK), are used for diagnosis. However, the association between temporal elevations of these biomarkers with disease trajectory and outcomes has not been established. METHODS: We analyzed the diagnostic accuracy and prognostic performances of cTnI, cTnT, and CK in patients with ICI myocarditis (n=60) through 1-year follow-up in 2 cardio-oncology units (APHP Sorbonne, Paris, France and Heidelberg, Germany). A total of 1751 (1 cTnT assay type), 920 (4 cTnI assay types), and 1191 CK sampling time points were available. Major adverse cardiomyotoxic events (MACE) were defined as heart failure, ventricular arrhythmia, atrioventricular or sinus block requiring pacemaker, respiratory muscle failure requiring mechanical ventilation, and sudden cardiac death. Diagnostic performance of cTnI and cTnT was also assessed in an international ICI myocarditis registry. RESULTS: Within 72 hours of admission, cTnT, cTnI, and CK were increased compared with upper reference limits (URLs) in 56 of 57 (98%), 37 of 42 ([88%] P=0.03 versus cTnT), and 43 of 57 ([75%] P<0.001 versus cTnT), respectively. This increased rate of positivity for cTnT (93%) versus cTnI ([64%] P<0.001) on admission was confirmed in 87 independent cases from an international registry. In the Franco-German cohort, 24 of 60 (40%) patients developed ≥1 MACE (total, 52; median time to first MACE, 5 [interquartile range, 2-16] days). The highest value of cTnT:URL within the first 72 hours of admission performed best in terms of association with MACE within 90 days (area under the curve, 0.84) than CK:URL (area under the curve, 0.70). A cTnT:URL ≥32 within 72 hours of admission was the best cut-off associated with MACE within 90 days (hazard ratio, 11.1 [95% CI, 3.2-38.0]; P<0.001), after adjustment for age and sex. cTnT was increased in all patients within 72 hours of the first MACE (23 of 23 [100%]), whereas cTnI and CK values were less than the URL in 2 of 19 (11%) and 6 of 22 (27%) of patients (P<0.001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: cTnT is associated with MACE and is sensitive for diagnosis and surveillance in patients with ICI myocarditis. A cTnT:URL ratio <32 within 72 hours of diagnosis is associated with a subgroup at low risk for MACE. Potential differences in diagnostic and prognostic performances between cTnT and cTnI as a function of the assays used deserve further evaluation in ICI myocarditis.

Increased myositis and possible myocarditis in melanoma patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in the COVID-19 era.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-mediated myocarditis results in significant morbidity and mortality. At our institution, we noted an increased incidence of ICI-mediated myocarditis cases, leading to further investigation in our database of advanced melanoma patients treated with ICI therapy. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective cohort analysis of patients with advanced melanoma identified cases of ICI-mediated myocarditis and myositis. RESULTS: 366 patients with advanced melanoma received a dose of ICI from September 2014 to October 2019. Of these patients, there were 0 cases of ICI-mediated myocarditis (0%, 95% CI 0%-1.0%) and 2 cases of ICI-mediated myositis (0.55%, 95% CI 0.07%-1.96%). From November 2019 to December 2021, an additional 246 patients with advanced melanoma were identified. Of these patients, 10 (4.1%, 95% CI 1.97%-7.35%) developed ICI-mediated myocarditis and 10 developed ICI-mediated myositis. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests an increase in prevalence of ICI-mediated muscle damage including myositis and myocarditis in the COVID-19 era. Differentiation of these patients and further risk stratification may allow for development of guidelines for nuanced management of this serious complication.

Achievement of LDL-C <55 mg/dL among US adults: Findings from the cvMOBIUS2 registry.

BACKGROUND: Reflecting clinical trial data showing improved outcomes with lower LDL-C levels, guidelines across the globe are increasingly recommending a goal of LDL-C <55 mg/dL in persons with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). What proportion of patients with ASCVD are already meeting those goals in the US remains understudied. METHODS: Using electronic health record data from 8 large US health systems, we evaluated lipid-lowering therapy (LLT), LDL-C levels, and factors associated with an LDL-C <55 mg/dL in persons with ASCVD treated between 1/1/2021-12/31/2021. Multivariable modeling was used to evaluate factors associated with achievement of an LDL-C <55 mg/dL. RESULTS: Among 167,899 eligible patients, 22.6% (38,016) had an LDL-C <55 mg/dL. While 76.1% of individuals overall were on a statin, only 38.2% were on a high-intensity statin, 5.9% were on ezetimibe, and 1.7% were on a PCSK9i monoclonal antibody (mAb). Factors associated with lower likelihood of achieving an LDL-C <55 mg/dL included: younger age (odds ratio [OR] 0.91 per 10y), female sex (OR 0.69), Black race (OR 0.76), and noncoronary artery disease forms of ASCVD including peripheral artery disease (OR 0.72) and cerebrovascular disease (OR 0.85), while high-intensity statin use was associated with increased odds of LDL-C <55 mg/dL (OR 1.55). Combination therapy (statin+ezetimibe or statin+PCSK9i mAb) was rare (4.4% and 0.5%, respectively) and was associated with higher odds of an LDL-C <55 mg/dL (OR 1.39 and 3.13, respectively). CONCLUSION: Less than a quarter of US patients with ASCVD in community practice are already achieving an LDL-C <55 mg/dL. Marked increases in utilization of both high intensity statins and combination therapy with non-statin therapy will be needed to achieve LDL-C levels <55 mg/dL at the population level in secondary prevention.

Intubation Decision Based on Illness Severity and Mortality in COVID-19: An International Study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of intubation timing, guided by severity criteria, on mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients, amidst existing uncertainties regarding optimal intubation practices. DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter, observational study conducted from February 1, 2020, to November 1, 2022. SETTING: Ten academic institutions in the United States and Europe. PATIENTS: Adults (≥ 18 yr old) confirmed with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and hospitalized specifically for COVID-19, requiring intubation postadmission. Exclusion criteria included patients hospitalized for non-COVID-19 reasons despite a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. INTERVENTIONS: Early invasive mechanical ventilation (EIMV) was defined as intubation in patients with less severe organ dysfunction (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [SOFA] < 7 or Pa o2 /F io2 ratio > 250), whereas late invasive mechanical ventilation (LIMV) was defined as intubation in patients with SOFA greater than or equal to 7 and Pa o2 /F io2 ratio less than or equal to 250. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was mortality within 30 days of hospital admission. Among 4464 patients, 854 (19.1%) required mechanical ventilation (mean age 60 yr, 61.7% male, 19.3% Black). Of those, 621 (72.7%) were categorized in the EIMV group and 233 (27.3%) in the LIMV group. Death within 30 days after admission occurred in 278 patients (42.2%) in the EIMV and 88 patients (46.6%) in the LIMV group ( p = 0.28). An inverse probability-of-treatment weighting analysis revealed a statistically significant association with mortality, with patients in the EIMV group being 32% less likely to die either within 30 days of admission (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52-0.90; p = 0.008) or within 30 days after intubation irrespective of its timing from admission (adjusted HR 0.70; 95% CI, 0.51-0.90; p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: In severe COVID-19 cases, an early intubation strategy, guided by specific severity criteria, is associated with a reduced risk of death. These findings underscore the importance of timely intervention based on objective severity assessments.

SuPAR, biomarkers of inflammation, and severe outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19: The International Study of Inflammation in COVID-19.

Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a hyperinflammatory syndrome. The biomarkers of inflammation best suited to triage patients with COVID-19 are unknown. We conducted a prospective multicenter observational study of adult patients hospitalized specifically for COVID-19 from February 1, 2020 to October 19, 2022. Biomarkers measured included soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR), C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, procalcitonin, ferritin, and D-dimer. In-hospital outcomes examined include death and the need for mechanical ventilation. Patients admitted in the United States (US, n = 1962) were used to compute area under the curves (AUCs) and identify biomarker cutoffs. The combined European cohorts (n = 1137) were used to validate the biomarker cutoffs. In the US cohort, 356 patients met the composite outcome of death (n = 197) or need for mechanical ventilation (n = 290). SuPAR was the most important predictor of the composite outcome and had the highest AUC (0.712) followed by CRP (0.642), ferritin (0.619), IL-6 (0.614), D-dimer (0.606), and lastly procalcitonin (0.596). Inclusion of other biomarkers did not improve discrimination. A suPAR cutoff of 4.0 ng/mL demonstrated a sensitivity of 95.4% (95% CI: 92.4%-98.0%) and negative predictive value (NPV) of 92.5% (95% CI: 87.5%-96.9%) for the composite outcome. Patients with suPAR < 4.0 ng/mL comprised 10.6% of the cohort and had a 0.8% probability of the composite outcome. Applying this cutoff to the validation cohort yielded a sensitivity of 93.8% (90.4%-96.7%) and NPV of 95.5% (93.1%-97.8%) for the composite outcome. Among commonly measured biomarkers, suPAR offered stronger discriminatory ability and may be useful in triaging low-risk patients with COVID-19.

A Definition of Neuromodulation and Classification of Implantable Electrical Modulation for Chronic Pain.

OBJECTIVES: Neuromodulation therapies use a variety of treatment modalities (eg, electrical stimulation) to treat chronic pain. These therapies have experienced rapid growth that has coincided with escalating confusion regarding the nomenclature surrounding these neuromodulation technologies. Furthermore, studies are often published without a complete description of the effective stimulation dose, making it impossible to replicate the findings. To improve clinical care and facilitate dissemination among the public, payors, research groups, and regulatory bodies, there is a clear need for a standardization of terms. APPROACH: We formed an international group of authors comprising basic scientists, anesthesiologists, neurosurgeons, and engineers with expertise in neuromodulation. Because the field of neuromodulation is extensive, we chose to focus on creating a taxonomy and standardized definitions for implantable electrical modulation of chronic pain. RESULTS: We first present a consensus definition of neuromodulation. We then describe a classification scheme based on the 1) intended use (the site of modulation and its indications) and 2) physical properties (waveforms and dose) of a neuromodulation therapy. CONCLUSIONS: This framework will help guide future high-quality studies of implantable neuromodulatory treatments and improve reporting of their findings. Standardization with this classification scheme and clear definitions will help physicians, researchers, payors, and patients better understand the applications of implantable electrical modulation for pain and guide informed treatment decisions.

The Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference (PACC)®: Updates on Clinical Pharmacology and Comorbidity Management in Intrathecal Drug Delivery for Cancer Pain.

INTRODUCTION: The International Neuromodulation Society convened a multispecialty group of physicians based on expertise with international representation to establish evidence-based guidance on using intrathecal drug delivery in chronic pain treatment. This Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference (PACC)® project's scope is to provide evidence-based guidance for clinical pharmacology and best practices for intrathecal drug delivery for cancer pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Authors were chosen on the basis of their clinical expertise, familiarity with the peer-reviewed literature, research productivity, and contributions to the neuromodulation literature. Section leaders supervised literature searches using Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, BioMed Central, Web of Science, Google Scholar, PubMed, Current Contents Connect, Meeting Abstracts, and Scopus from 2017 (when the PACC last published guidelines) to the present. Identified studies were graded using the United States Preventive Services Task Force criteria for evidence and certainty of net benefit. Recommendations were based on the strength of evidence, and when evidence was scant, recommendations were based on expert consensus. RESULTS: The PACC evaluated the published literature and established evidence- and consensus-based expert opinion recommendations to guide best practices in treating cancer pain. Additional guidance will occur as new evidence is developed in future iterations of this process. CONCLUSIONS: The PACC recommends best practices regarding the use of intrathecal drug delivery in cancer pain, with an emphasis on managing the unique disease and patient characteristics encountered in oncology. These evidence- and consensus-based expert opinion recommendations should be used as a guide to assist decision-making when clinically appropriate.

The Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference (PACC)®: Intrathecal Drug Delivery Guidance on Safety and Therapy Optimization When Treating Chronic Noncancer Pain.

INTRODUCTION: The International Neuromodulation Society convened a multispecialty group of physicians and scientists based on expertise with international representation to establish evidence-based guidance on intrathecal drug delivery in treating chronic pain. This Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference (PACC)® project, created more than two decades ago, intends to provide evidence-based guidance for important safety and efficacy issues surrounding intrathecal drug delivery and its impact on the practice of neuromodulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Authors were chosen on the basis of their clinical expertise, familiarity with the peer-reviewed literature, research productivity, and contributions to the neuromodulation literature. Section leaders supervised literature searches of MEDLINE, BioMed Central, Current Contents Connect, Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and PubMed from 2017 (when PACC® last published guidelines) to the present. Identified studies were graded using the United States Preventive Services Task Force criteria for evidence and certainty of net benefit. Recommendations are based on the strength of evidence or consensus when evidence is scant. RESULTS: The PACC® examined the published literature and established evidence- and consensus-based recommendations to guide best practices. Additional guidance will occur as new evidence is developed in future iterations of this process. CONCLUSIONS: The PACC® recommends best practices regarding intrathecal drug delivery to improve safety and efficacy. The evidence- and consensus-based recommendations should be used as a guide to assist decision-making when clinically appropriate.

Five-Year Longitudinal Follow-Up of Restorative Neurostimulation Shows Durability of Effectiveness in Patients With Refractory Chronic Low Back Pain Associated With Multifidus Muscle Dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Adults with refractory, mechanical chronic low back pain associated with impaired neuromuscular control of the lumbar multifidus muscle have few treatment options that provide long-term clinical benefit. This study hypothesized that restorative neurostimulation, a rehabilitative treatment that activates the lumbar multifidus muscles to overcome underlying dysfunction, is safe and provides relevant and durable clinical benefit to patients with this specific etiology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective five-year longitudinal follow-up of the ReActiv8-B pivotal trial, participants (N = 204) had activity-limiting, moderate-to-severe, refractory, mechanical chronic low back pain, a positive prone instability test result indicating impaired multifidus muscle control, and no indications for spine surgery. Low back pain intensity (10-cm visual analog scale [VAS]), disability (Oswestry Disability Index), and quality of life (EuroQol's "EQ-5D-5L" index) were compared with baseline and following the intent-to-treat principle, with a supporting mixed-effects model for repeated measures that accounted for missing data. RESULTS: At five years (n = 126), low back pain VAS had improved from 7.3 to 2.4 cm (-4.9; 95% CI, -5.3 to -4.5 cm; p < 0.0001), and 71.8% of participants had a reduction of ≥50%. The Oswestry Disability Index improved from 39.1 to 16.5 (-22.7; 95% CI, -25.4 to -20.8; p < 0.0001), and 61.1% of participants had reduction of ≥20 points. The EQ-5D-5L index improved from 0.585 to 0.807 (0.231; 95% CI, 0.195-0.267; p < 0.0001). Although the mixed-effects model attenuated completed-case results, conclusions and statistical significance were maintained. Of 52 subjects who were on opioids at baseline and had a five-year visit, 46% discontinued, and 23% decreased intake. The safety profile compared favorably with neurostimulator treatments for other types of back pain. No lead migrations were observed. CONCLUSION: Over a five-year period, restorative neurostimulation provided clinically substantial and durable benefits with a favorable safety profile in patients with refractory chronic low back pain associated with multifidus muscle dysfunction. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Clinicaltrials.gov registration number for the study is NCT02577354; registration date: October 15, 2016; principal investigator: Christopher Gilligan, MD, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. The study was conducted in Australia (Broadmeadow, New South Wales; Noosa Heads, Queensland; Welland, South Australia; Clayton, Victoria), Belgium (Sint-Niklaas; Wilrijk), The Netherlands (Rotterdam), UK (Leeds, London, Middlesbrough), and USA (La Jolla, CA; Santa Monica, CA; Aurora, CO; Carmel, IN; Indianapolis, IN; Kansas City, KS; Boston, MA; Royal Oak, MI; Durham, NC; Winston-Salem, NC; Cleveland, OH; Providence, RI; Spartanburg, SC; Spokane, WA; Charleston, WV).

Maximal Analgesic Effect Attained by the Use of Objective Neurophysiological Measurements With Closed-Loop Spinal Cord Stimulation.

OBJECTIVES: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been challenged by the lack of neurophysiologic data to guide therapy optimization. Current SCS programming by trial-and-error results in suboptimal and variable therapeutic effects. A novel system with a physiologic closed-loop feedback mechanism using evoked-compound action potentials enables the optimization of physiologic neural dose by consistently and accurately activating spinal cord fibers. We aimed to identify neurophysiologic dose metrics and their ranges that resulted in clinically meaningful treatment responses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Subjects from 3 clinical studies (n = 180) with baseline back and leg pain ≥60 mm visual analog scale and physical function in the severe to crippled category were included. Maximal analgesic effect (MAE) was operationally defined as the greatest percent reduction in pain intensity or as the greatest cumulative responder score (minimal clinically important differences [MCIDs]) obtained within the first 3 months of SCS implant. The physiologic metrics that produced the MAE were analyzed. RESULTS: We showed that a neural dose regimen with a high neural dose accuracy of 2.8µV and dose ratio of 1.4 resulted in a profound clinical benefit to chronic pain patients (MAE of 79 ± 1% for pain reduction and 12.5 ± 0.4 MCIDs). No differences were observed for MAE or neurophysiological dose metrics between the trial phase and post-implant MAE visit. CONCLUSION: For the first time, an evidence-based neural dose regimen is available for a neurostimulation intervention as a starting point to enable optimization of clinical benefit, monitoring of adherence, and management of the therapy.

The Neurostimulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC)®: Recommendations for the Mitigation of Complications of Neurostimulation.

INTRODUCTION: The International Neuromodulation Society convened a multispecialty group of physicians based on expertise and international representation to establish evidence-based guidance on the mitigation of neuromodulation complications. This Neurostimulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC)® project intends to update evidence-based guidance and offer expert opinion that will improve efficacy and safety. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Authors were chosen on the basis of their clinical expertise, familiarity with the peer-reviewed literature, research productivity, and contributions to the neuromodulation literature. Section leaders supervised literature searches of MEDLINE, BioMed Central, Current Contents Connect, Embase, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and PubMed from 2017 (when NACC last published guidelines) to October 2023. Identified studies were graded using the United States Preventive Services Task Force criteria for evidence and certainty of net benefit. Recommendations are based on the strength of evidence or consensus when evidence was scant. RESULTS: The NACC examined the published literature and established evidence- and consensus-based recommendations to guide best practices. Additional guidance will occur as new evidence is developed in future iterations of this process. CONCLUSIONS: The NACC recommends best practices regarding the mitigation of complications associated with neurostimulation to improve safety and efficacy. The evidence- and consensus-based recommendations should be used as a guide to assist decision-making when clinically appropriate.

The Neurostimulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC)®: Recommendations for Spinal Cord Stimulation Long-Term Outcome Optimization and Salvage Therapy.

INTRODUCTION: The International Neuromodulation Society (INS) has recognized a need to establish best practices for optimizing implantable devices and salvage when ideal outcomes are not realized. This group has established the Neurostimulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC)® to offer guidance on matters needed for both our members and the broader community of those affected by neuromodulation devices. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The executive committee of the INS nominated faculty for this NACC® publication on the basis of expertise, publications, and career work on the issue. In addition, the faculty was chosen in consideration of diversity and inclusion of different career paths and demographic categories. Once chosen, the faculty was asked to grade current evidence and along with expert opinion create consensus recommendations to address the lapses in information on this topic. RESULTS: The NACC® group established informative and authoritative recommendations on the salvage and optimization of care for those with indwelling devices. The recommendations are based on evidence and expert opinion and will be expected to evolve as new data are generated for each topic. CONCLUSIONS: NACC® guidance should be considered for any patient with less-than-optimal outcomes with a stimulation device implanted for treating chronic pain. Consideration should be given to these consensus points to salvage a potentially failed device before explant.

Neuromodulation treatments for migraine: a contemporary update.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Neuromodulation approaches have been a part of a revolution in migraine therapies with multiple devices approved or in development. These devices vary in the nerve(s) being targeted, implantable versus noninvasive form factors as well as their effectiveness for acute pain reduction or migraine prevention. This review will summarize these recent advancements and approaches that are being developed which build upon prior work and improved technology that may help enhance the effectiveness as well as the patient experience. RECENT FINDINGS: Both noninvasive and implantable devices primarily targeting cranial nerves have shown the ability to help alleviate migraine symptoms. Multiple prospective and retrospective studies have demonstrated clinically meaningful reductions in headache intensity with noninvasive approaches, while prevention of migraine demonstrates more modest effects. Implantable neuromodulation technologies focusing on occipital and supraorbital stimulation have shown promise in migraine/headache prevention in chronic migraine patients, but there is a need for improvements in technology to address key needs for surgical approaches. SUMMARY: Electrical neuromodulation approaches in the treatment of migraine is undergoing a transformation towards improved outcomes with better technologies that may suit various patient needs on a more individualized basis.

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

AIM: The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021. Structure: Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021. Structure: Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

Soluble Urokinase Receptor and Acute Kidney Injury.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury is common, with a major effect on morbidity and health care utilization. Soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) is a signaling glycoprotein thought to be involved in the pathogenesis of kidney disease. We investigated whether a high level of suPAR predisposed patients to acute kidney injury in multiple clinical contexts, and we used experimental models to identify mechanisms by which suPAR acts and to assess it as a therapeutic target. METHODS: We measured plasma levels of suPAR preprocedurally in patients who underwent coronary angiography and patients who underwent cardiac surgery and at the time of admission to the intensive care unit in critically ill patients. We assessed the risk of acute kidney injury at 7 days as the primary outcome and acute kidney injury or death at 90 days as a secondary outcome, according to quartile of suPAR level. In experimental studies, we used a monoclonal antibody to urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (uPAR) as a therapeutic strategy to attenuate acute kidney injury in transgenic mice receiving contrast material. We also assessed cellular bioenergetics and generation of reactive oxygen species in human kidney proximal tubular (HK-2) cells that were exposed to recombinant suPAR. RESULTS: The suPAR level was assessed in 3827 patients who were undergoing coronary angiography, 250 who were undergoing cardiac surgery, and 692 who were critically ill. Acute kidney injury developed in 318 patients (8%) who had undergone coronary angiography. The highest suPAR quartile (vs. the lowest) had an adjusted odds ratio of 2.66 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.77 to 3.99) for acute kidney injury and 2.29 (95% CI, 1.71 to 3.06) for acute kidney injury or death at 90 days. Findings were similar in the surgical and critically ill cohorts. The suPAR-overexpressing mice that were given contrast material had greater functional and histologic evidence of acute kidney injury than wild-type mice. The suPAR-treated HK-2 cells showed heightened energetic demand and mitochondrial superoxide generation. Pretreatment with a uPAR monoclonal antibody attenuated kidney injury in suPAR-overexpressing mice and normalized bioenergetic changes in HK-2 cells. CONCLUSIONS: High suPAR levels were associated with acute kidney injury in various clinical and experimental contexts. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others.).

Soluble Urokinase Plasminogen Activator Receptor Levels and Outcomes in Patients with Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) is a marker of immune activation and pathogenic factor for kidney disease shown to predict cardiovascular outcomes including heart failure (HF) in various populations. We characterized suPAR levels in patients with HF and compared its ability to discriminate risk to that of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP). METHODS AND RESULTS: We measured plasma suPAR and BNP levels in 3,437 patients undergoing coronary angiogram and followed for a median of 6.2 years. We performed survival analyses for the following outcomes: all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and hospitalization for HF. We then assessed suPAR's ability to discriminate risk for the aforementioned outcomes. We identified 1116 patients with HF (age 65±12, 67.2% male, 20.0% Black, 67% with reduced ejection fraction). The median suPAR level was higher in HF compared to those without HF (3370 [IQR 2610-4371] vs. 2880 [IQR 2270-3670] pg/mL, respectively, P<0.001). In patients with HF, suPAR levels (log-base 2) were associated with outcomes including all-cause death (adjusted hazard ratio aHR 2.30, 95%CI[1.90-2.77]), cardiovascular death (aHR 2.33 95%CI[1.81-2.99]) and HF hospitalization (aHR 1.96, 95%CI[1.06-1.25]) independently of clinical characteristics and BNP levels. The association persisted across subgroups and did not differ between patients with reduced or preserved ejection fraction, or those with ischemic or non-ischemic cardiomyopathy. Addition of suPAR to a model including BNP levels significantly improved the C-statistic for death (Δ0.027), cardiovascular death (Δ0.017) and hospitalization for HF (Δ0.017). CONCLUSIONS: SuPAR levels are higher in HF compared to non-HF, are strongly predictive of outcomes, and combined with BNP, significantly improved risk prediction.

Efficacy of Continuous Intrathecal Infusion Trialing with a Mixture of Fentanyl and Bupivacaine in Chronic Low Back Pain Patients.

Intrathecal trialing is used as a screening prognostic measure prior to intrathecal drug delivery system implant. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of a continuous intrathecal infusion of an admixture of bupivacaine and fentanyl in patients with chronic low back pain. Patients with refractory chronic low back pain in the setting of previous lumbar spine surgery and/or chronic vertebral compression fracture(s) were enrolled in a randomized double blind cross-over study comparing saline infusion to infusion of a solution containing bupivacaine combined with low-dose fentanyl over a 14-18 hour period. The primary outcome measure was the change in pain intensity at the end of the screening trial. Patients who experienced significant pain reduction from either infusion relative to baseline pain were offered a permanent implant. In total, 36 patients were enrolled, with 31 patients trialed and 25 implanted. At the end of the screening trial, pain scores, at rest or with activity, decreased appreciably in both groups; however, significantly better improvements occurred in the fentanyl/bupivacaine group compared to saline both with activity and at rest (P = .016 and .006, respectively). Treatment order appeared to affect outcome with saline demonstrating a placebo response. At 12 months following implant, primary and secondary outcome measures continued to be significantly reduced from baseline. Continuous intrathecal delivery of a combination of zlow-dose fentanyl with bupivacaine is superior to saline in screening intrathecal trialing for back pain reduction. With longer term delivery, a sustained reduction of chronic low back pain was also observed.