Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Is Associated With Reduced Hospital Length of Stay after Urgent or Emergency Isolated Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery at an Urban, Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis With Propensity Score Matching.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) was associated with reduced length of stay (LOS) after urgent or emergency coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of an institutional database for urgent or emergency isolated CABG before versus after ERAS. Propensity matching identified comparable subpopulations pre- versus post-ERAS. Interrupted time series analysis was used to evaluate LOS. SETTING: At a tertiary care teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1,012 patients undergoing urgent or emergent CABG-346 from 2016 to 2017 (pre-ERAS), and 666 from 2018 to 2020 (post-ERAS). Emergent CABG was performed within 24 hours, and urgent CABG was performed during the same hospitalization to reduce clinical risk. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Propensity-matched post-ERAS (n = 565) versus pre-ERAS patients (n = 330) demonstrated reduced LOS (9 [8-13] v (10 [8-14] days p = 0.015), increased likelihood of extubation within 6 hours (46.0% v 35.8%, p = 0.003), shorter ventilation time (6.3 [5.1-10.2] v (7.2 [5.4-12.2] hours, p = 0.003), reduced morphine milligram equivalent use on postoperative days 1 and 2 (69.6 ± 62.2 v 99.0 ± 61.6, p < 0.001), and increased intraoperative ketamine use (58.8% v 35.2%, p < 0.001). There were no differences regarding reintubation, intensive care unit readmission, or 30-day morbidity. Adjusted segmental regression (n = 1,012) for LOS demonstrated reduced mean LOS of approximately 2 days after ERAS (ß2 coefficient -1.943 [-3.766 to -0.121], p = 0.037), with stable trends for mean LOS and no change in slope throughout the pre-ERAS and post-ERAS time periods. CONCLUSIONS: Enhanced recovery after surgery was associated with reduced LOS after urgent or emergency CABG without adverse effects on prolonged ventilation, reintubation, intensive care unit readmission, or 30-day outcomes.

The impact of asthma on in-hospital outcomes of COVID-19 patients.

OBJECTIVE: The impact of asthma as a possible risk factor for adverse clinical outcomes in patients diagnosed with COVID-19 remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of asthma on adverse clinical outcomes in a COVID-19 hospitalized cohort. METHODS: Retrospective, propensity-matched observational study of consecutive COVID-19-positive patients between February 24, 2020, and November 3, 2020 at a single health care system. RESULTS: In the initial population of 1925 patients, 4.4% presented with asthma. Propensity score matching reduced the total sample to n = 1045: 88 (8.4%) with asthma and n = 957 without asthma. A total of 164 (15.7%) patients died during the hospitalization, including 7 (8.0%) in the asthma group and 157 (16.4%), p = .037, in the non-asthmatic cohort. There was no difference between these groups in need for mechanical ventilation, length of stay on a ventilator, or hospital length of stay.Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that asthma was an independent predictor of lower mortality, while older age, BMI > 30 kg/m2, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, and admission National Early Warning Score (NEWS) were significantly associated with an increased risk of in-hospital death. There were no significant differences between asthmatic and non-asthmatic cohorts with respect to need for mechanical ventilation, length of mechanical ventilation, serum markers of severe COVID-19 disease, or overall length of hospital stay. CONCLUSION: We conclude that asthma in hospitalized COVID-19 patients is associated with a lower risk of mortality and no increase in disease severity in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Is Associated With Improved Outcomes and Reduced Racial and Ethnic Disparities After Isolated Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery: A Retrospective Analysis With Propensity-Score Matching.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol implementation was associated with improved outcomes and decreased racial and ethnic outcome disparities after isolated coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of an institutional CABG database with propensity-score matching. SETTING: At a single tertiary care teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: One thousand seven hundred thirty-five patients undergoing isolated CABG: 656 patients from 2016 to 2017 (pre-ERAS) and 1,079 patients from 2018 to 2020 (post-ERAS). Each patient cohort was divided into a White subgroup and a racial and ethnic minorities (Minorities) subgroup. INTERVENTIONS: None MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Propensity-matched post-ERAS patients (n = 584) compared to pre-ERAS patients (n = 584) demonstrated reductions in total length of stay (LOS) (median [interquartile range]): (7 [5-10] v 8 [6-11.5] days, p = .006), postoperative LOS (5 [4-7] v 5 [4-7] days, p = .001), total ventilation time (6.1 [4.8-9.5] v 6.6 [5.2-10.9] hours, p = .004), postoperative morphine milligram equivalents (mean ± standard deviation: 68.6 ± 57.5 v 100.0 ± 59.4, p < .001), and increased likelihood of early extubation (48.8% v 42.3%, p = .026); the Minorities subgroup demonstrated reductions in likelihood of intensive care unit (ICU) readmission (1.3% v 8.1%, p = .012) and postoperative morphine milligram equivalents (73.6 ± 64.0 v 107.8 ± 71.9, p < .001). Logistic regression models demonstrated that disparities in ICU readmission and postoperative LOS between White and Minorities patients were eliminated post-ERAS. CONCLUSIONS: ERAS for isolated CABG surgery was associated with reduced total and postoperative LOS, reduced total ventilation time, and increased early extubation for all patients, as well as reduced ICU readmission for the Minorities subgroup. ERAS implementation was associated with reduced disparities between White and racial and ethnic minority patients for ICU readmission and postoperative LOS.

Impact of Famotidine Use on Clinical Outcomes of Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: To compare outcomes in patients hospitalized with coronavirus (COVID-19) receiving famotidine therapy with those not receiving famotidine. METHODS: Retrospective, propensity-matched observational study of consecutive COVID-19-positive patients between February 24, 2020, and May 13, 2020. RESULTS: Of 878 patients in the analysis, 83 (9.5%) received famotidine. In comparison to patients not treated with famotidine, patients treated with famotidine were younger (63.5 ± 15.0 vs 67.5 ± 15.8 years, P = 0.021), but did not differ with respect to baseline demographics or preexisting comorbidities. Use of famotidine was associated with a decreased risk of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio 0.37, 95% confidence interval 0.16-0.86, P = 0.021) and combined death or intubation (odds ratio 0.47, 95% confidence interval 0.23-0.96, P = 0.040). Propensity score matching to adjust for age difference between groups did not alter the effect on either outcome. In addition, patients receiving famotidine displayed lower levels of serum markers for severe disease including lower median peak C-reactive protein levels (9.4 vs 12.7 mg/dL, P = 0.002), lower median procalcitonin levels (0.16 vs 0.30 ng/mL, P = 0.004), and a nonsignificant trend to lower median mean ferritin levels (797.5 vs 964.0 ng/mL, P = 0.076). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that famotidine was an independent predictor of both lower mortality and combined death/intubation, whereas older age, body mass index >30 kg/m, chronic kidney disease, National Early Warning Score, and higher neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio were all predictors of both adverse outcomes. DISCUSSION: Famotidine use in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is associated with a lower risk of mortality, lower risk of combined outcome of mortality and intubation, and lower levels of serum markers for severe disease in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.(Equation is included in full-text article.).

Impact of Persistent Versus Paroxysmal Preoperative Atrial Fibrillation on In-Hospital, One-Year and Late Clinical Outcomes Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

Prior reports on the impact of pre-existing atrial fibrillation (AF) on clinical outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) have presented limited data on the relative impact of paroxysmal versus persistent AF sub-types. We compared in-hospital, 1-year and late clinical outcomes in 1,098 TAVI patients with preoperative AF (556 paroxysmal, 542 persistent) versus 1,787 No-AF patients. Propensity matched AF (n=643) and No-AF (n=686) cohorts did not differ with respect to baseline clinical characteristics, operative technique or in-hospital TAVI complications. At 1-year, AF patients had higher all-cause mortality (9.0 vs 6.1%, p=0.046) and readmission rates (13.1 vs 8.8%, p=0.014), with lower KCCQ12 scores (77.8±21.8 vs 84.3±17.1, p<0.001). Echocardiographic follow-up (mean time 455 ± 285 days) demonstrated no significant inter-group differences in hemodynamic findings other than a progressive increase in left atrial volume index (LAVI) in patient subgroups (No-AF:37.4±14.7 ml/m2 vs paroxysmal AF: 46.4±21.4 ml/m2 vs persistent AF: 60.5±26.3 ml/m2; p<0.001). On late follow-up (mean time 49.0 (45.1-52.9) months), patients with persistent AF had worse all-cause mortality compared to No-AF patients (HR: 1.55; 95% CI: 1.17-2.06, p=0.003), with no significant survival differences between the paroxysmal AF and No-AF subgroups. In conclusion, pre-existing AF compared to No-AF TAVI patients had similar in-hospital outcomes, but worse 1-year mortality, hospital readmission and quality of life outcomes. Compared to No-AF patients, patients with persistent, but not paroxysmal preexisting AF, have higher late all-cause mortality at a mean follow-up of 49 months. Patients with persistent AF have higher levels of LAVI compared to paroxysmal and No-AF patients on intermediate echocardiographic follow-up.

Half-dose direct oral anticoagulation versus warfarin for atrial fibrillation following cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: Optimal anticoagulation strategies have not been defined for patients with atrial fibrillation following cardiac surgery. METHODS: From a total cohort of 228 patients with pre-existing or new onset atrial fibrillation following coronary artery bypass grafting and/or valve surgery, we compared in-hospital and 30-day outcomes in 119 patients treated with low-dose aspirin and a half-dose direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) versus 109 treated with low-dose aspirin and warfarin. RESULTS: DOAC patients were older (73.1±7.0 vs. 68.7±11.4 years, P<0.001) and had a lower incidence of preoperative atrial fibrillation (37 [31.1%] vs. 69 [63.3%], P<0.001). Otherwise, the two cohorts were well matched for baseline demographics, cardiovascular risk factors, comorbidities, prior cardiac history and STS Risk Score. In comparison to Warfarin patients, DOAC patients had a shorter length of post-surgical stay (6 [5-8] vs. 7 [5-10] days, P=0.037). The two cohorts, however, had a similar incidence of stroke, transient ischemic attack, reoperation for bleeding and postoperative blood bank product usage. Follow-up 30-day outcomes did not differ between the two groups with respect to mortality (0 [0.0%] vs. 0 [0.0%], P=1.000) and hospital readmission (16 [13.4%] vs. 14 [12.8%], P=0.893), although two DOAC patients required drainage of sanguineous pericardial effusions. CONCLUSIONS: In comparison to warfarin, half-dose DOAC anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation following cardiac surgery is associated with a shorter postoperative length of stay, without a significant increase in stroke/transient ischemic attack, reoperation for bleeding or postoperative blood product transfusion. Follow-up echocardiography in anticoagulated patients is recommended to rule out significant sanguineous pericardial effusions in the early postoperative period following hospital discharge.

In-Hospital and One-Year Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients Requiring Supplemental Home Oxygen Use.

Background: There have been limited reports with inconsistent results on the impact of long-term use of oxygen therapry (LTOT) in patients treated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Methods: We compared in-hospital and intermediate TAVR outcomes in 150 patients requiring LTOT (home O2 cohort) with 2,313 non-home O2 patients. Results: Home O2 patients were younger, and had more comorbidities including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes, carotid artery disease, lower forced expiratory volume (FEV1) (50.3±21.1% vs. 75.0±24.7%, P < 0.001), and lower diffusion capacity (DLCO, 48.6±19.2% vs. 74.6±22.4%, P < 0.001). These differences represented higher baseline Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk score (15.5±10.2% vs. 9.3±7.0%, P < 0.001) and lower pre-procedure Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ-12) scores (32.5 ± 22.2 vs. 49.1 ± 25.4, P < 0.001). The home O2 cohort required higher use of alternative TAVR vascular access (24.0% vs. 12.8%, P = 0.002) and general anesthesia (51.3% vs. 36.0%, P < 0.001). Compared to non-home O2 patients, home O2 patients showed increased in-hospital mortality (5.3% vs. 1.6%, P = 0.001), procedural cardiac arrest (4.7% vs. 1.0%, P < 0.001), and postoperative atrial fibrillation (4.0% vs. 1.5%, P = 0.013). At 1-year follow-up, the home O2 cohort had a higher all-cause mortality (17.3% vs. 7.5%, P < 0.001) and lower KCCQ-12 scores (69.5 ± 23.8 vs. 82.1 ± 19.4, P < 0.001). Kaplan-Meir analysis revealed a lower survival rate in the home O2 cohort with an overall mean (95% confidence interval (CI)) survival time of 6.2 (5.9 - 6.5) years (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Home O2 patients represent a high-risk TAVR cohort with increased in-hospital morbidity and mortality, less improvement in 1-year KCCQ-12, and increased mortality at intermediate follow-up.

Intermediate Follow-Up of Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients With Small Aortic Annuli.

The clinical impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) in patients with small aortic annuli who underwent transcatheter aortic valve (AV) implantation with either balloon-expandable (BE) or self-expanding (SE) valves remains controversial. We assessed in-hospital and intermediate clinical outcomes in 573 patients with transfemoral transcatheter AV implantation with a small AV annulus, defined as an AV annulus area ≤430 mm2. A total of 337 patients treated with a 23-mm BE valve (SAPIEN 3, Ultra) were compared with 236 patients treated with a 26-mm SE valve (Evolut series). Valve-in-valve cases were excluded, and late echo follow-up (mean 674 ± 438 days) was assessed in a subset of 292 patients (51.0%). Well-matched BE and SE cohorts did not differ with respect to major in-hospital outcomes, other than a borderline increase in vascular complications and composite bleeding in patients with SE. Patients with BE had a higher incidence of severe PPM on discharge echocardiography (16.9% vs 6.8%, p <0.002). The mean AV gradient at 30 days was higher for patients with BE (12.2 ± 4.2 vs 6.2 ± 7.9 mm Hg, p <0.001) and at late follow-up (14.0 ± 8.2 vs 7.2 ± 3.5 mm Hg, p <0.001). The follow-up left ventricular ejection fraction and incidence of >mild aortic insufficiency were similar. All-cause mortality for the 2 cohorts was similar, with an overall mean (95% confidence interval) survival time of 61.2 months (57.8 to 64.5; p = 0.98). There were no significant survival differences between combined patients with BE and SE with no, moderate, or severe PPM, with an overall mean (95% confidence interval) survival time of 32.5 (30.5 to 34.5) months combining valve types (p = 0.23). In conclusion, despite an increased incidence of PPM with higher mean AV gradients that persist on late echocardiography in the BE cohort, patients with BE and SE with small aortic annuli have similar clinical outcomes at intermediate follow-up. Moderate and severe PPM had no impact on survival at a mean follow-up of 32.5 months.

Impact of Ticagrelor Versus Clopidogrel on Bleeding Outcomes of Isolated Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.

BACKGROUND: Increased bleeding risks have been documented in patients exposed to P2Y12 inhibitors within 5 days of coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG). This study aimed to determine the relative CABG bleeding risks of clopidogrel versus ticagrelor exposure and the proper time course of ticagrelor discontinuation prior to surgery. METHODS: Clinical outcomes were assessed in 2075 isolated CABG patients, including 375 who had received P2Y12 inhibitors within 5 days of surgery (155 clopidogrel, 213 ticagrelor, 7 prasugrel). BARC-4 CABG bleeding complications and perioperative blood product usage were assessed in propensity-matched P2Y12-inhibited and non-P2Y12-inhibited cohorts. RESULTS: P2Y12-inhibited patients (n = 375) in comparison to matched non-P2Y12-inhibited patients (n = 1138) had higher rates of re-operation for bleeding (3.8 % vs 1.3 %, p = 0.003), postoperative red blood cell transfusion ≥5 units (5.7 % vs 2.7 %, p = 0.007), and intraoperative and postoperative blood product utilization (42.3 % vs 27.1 %, p < 0.001; 41.8 % vs 32.2 %, p < 0.001, respectively). Univariate predictors of BARC-4 bleeding included clopidogrel (OR: 2.145, 95 % CI: 1.131-4.067, p = 0.019) and ticagrelor discontinued within 3 days of surgery (OR: 2.153, 95 % CI: 1.003-4.169, p = 0.049). Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that only clopidogrel exposure was an independent BARC-4 bleeding predictor (OR: 1.850, 95 % CI: 1.007-3.398, p = 0.048). Unadjusted ticagrelor patients with drug discontinuation 4-5 days prior to CABG only demonstrated higher rates of perioperative platelet transfusion, without additional signs of excessive bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Clopidogrel exposure within 5 days of CABG is an independent predictor of BARC-4 bleeding, whereas major ticagrelor bleeding effects are confined to drug exposure within 3 days of surgery.

The Benefit of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Before Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Multicenter Retrospective Outcome-Based Study.

There is inadequate evidence regarding the role of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The current American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines are limited to class 2A recommendations for pre-TAVR revascularization in the setting of hemodynamically significant left main (LM), proximal left anterior descending (pLAD), or extensive bifurcation disease regardless of angina status. We performed a multicenter, retrospective, observational study assessing the benefit of PCI in patients with coronary artery disease who underwent transfemoral TAVR for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts: (1) patients who did not undergo pre-TAVR PCI within the preceding 12 months (no-PCI group) and (2) patients who received pre-TAVR PCI within the preceding 12 months (PCI group). The primary outcome was defined as the composite end point of in-hospital and 30-day adverse events, including all-cause mortality, cardiac arrest, and myocardial infarction. Subgroup analyses were performed on patients with LM and/or pLAD disease and other high-risk features, including angina and heart failure. Comparisons were made between 1,809 consecutive patients (1,364 in the no-PCI group and 445 in the PCI group). There were no differences between the 2 cohorts regarding the primary composite outcome (2.0% vs 2.8%, p = 0.918) or individual secondary outcomes. Although LM/pLAD disease, New York Heart Association classes III to IV, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score ≥8 were all independent predictors of the primary outcome, none of the subgroups demonstrated a benefit favoring PCI. In conclusion, there is no observed benefit from PCI within 12 months pre-TAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis and concomitant coronary artery disease, including patients with LM/pLAD disease.

Racial and ethnic disparities in the treatment and outcomes for witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in Connecticut.

BACKGROUND: Racial and ethnic disparities in the treatment and outcomes for witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in the United States have been previously described. We sought to characterize disparities in pre-hospital care, overall survival, and survival with favorable neurological outcomes following witnessed OHCA in the state of Connecticut. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study to compare pre-hospital treatment and outcomes for White versus Black and Hispanic (Minority) OHCA patients submitted from Connecticut to the Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival (CARES) between 2013 and 2021. Primary outcomes included bystander CPR use, bystander automated external defibrillator (AED) use with attempted defibrillation, overall survival, and survival with favorable cerebral function. RESULTS: 2,809 patients with witnessed OHCA were analyzed (924 Black or Hispanic; 1885 White). Minorities had lower rates of bystander CPR (31.4% vs 39.1%, P = 0.002) and bystander AED placement with attempted defibrillation (10.5% vs 14.4%, P = 0.004), with lower rates of survival to hospital discharge (10.3% vs 14.8%, P = 0.001) and survival with favorable cerebral function (65.3% vs 80.2%, P = 0.003). Minorities were less likely to receive bystander CPR in communities with median annual household income >$80, 000 (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.33-0.95; P = 0.030) and in integrated neighborhoods (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.52-0.95; P = 0.020). CONCLUSIONS: Black and Hispanic Connecticut patients with witnessed OHCA have lower rates of bystander CPR, attempted AED defibrillation, overall survival, and survival with favorable neurological outcomes compared to White patients. Minorities were less likely to receive bystander CPR in affluent and integrated communities.

Recovery From the Impact of COVID-19 on Treatment Times and Clinical Outcomes of Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: An Interim Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have documented a negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on emergent percutaneous treatment of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), but few have examined recovery of healthcare systems in restoring prepandemic STEMI care. METHODS: Retrospective analysis was performed of data from 789 patients with STEMI from a large tertiary medical center treated with percutaneous coronary intervention between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2021. RESULTS: For patients with STEMI presenting to the emergency department, median time from door to balloon was 37 minutes in 2019, 53 minutes in 2020, and 48 minutes in 2021 (P < .001), whereas median time from first medical contact to device changed from 70 to 82 to 75 minutes, respectively (P = .002). Treatment time changes in 2020 and 2021 correlated with median emergency department evaluation time (30 to 41 to 22 minutes, respectively; P = .001) but not median catheterization laboratory revascularization time. For transfer patients, median time from first medical contact to device changed from 110 to 133 to 118 minutes, respectively (P = .005). In 2020 and 2021, patients with STEMI had greater late presentation (P = .028) and late mechanical complications (P = .021), with nonsignificant increases in yearly in-hospital mortality (3.6% to 5.2% to 6.4%; P = .352). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 was associated with worsening STEMI treatment times and outcomes in 2020. Despite improving treatment times in 2021, in-hospital mortality had not decreased in the setting of a persistent increase in late patient presentation and associated STEMI complications.

Major adverse cardiac events among postpercutaneous coronary intervention patients on clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitors.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and clopidogrel is associated with adverse events among postpercutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients. METHODS: This is a single-center, retrospective case-control study of 3,287 consecutive patients on clopidogrel who underwent PCI. Univariate and multivariate analyses determined if concomitant PPI and clopidogrel use was associated with major adverse cardiac events (MACE). RESULTS: There were significantly more deaths (3.0% vs 1.1%; P < 0.001), repeat revascularizations (3.8% vs 2.1%; P = 0.005) and MACE (7.1% vs 3.5%; P < 0.001) in the clopidogrel and PPI group. Cox regression revealed that PPI is an independent predictor of MACE (HR 1.70, 95% CI of 1.20-2.41; P = 0.003), mortality (HR 1.79; 95% CI 1.03-3.12, P = 0.038), and target-vessel revascularization (HR 1.75; 95% CI 1.12-2.72, P = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant use of PPIs and clopidogrel among post PCI patients was associated with increased rates of all-cause mortality, target vessel revascularization, and combined MACE at nine months follow-up.

CYP2C19 genotype-guided antiplatelet therapy in a patient with clopidogrel resistance.

We report a switch in antiplatelet medication based on platelet function and CYP2C19 genotype test results in a 74-year-old man with severe coronary arterial disease. Upon bare metal stent implantation at age 66, clopidogrel therapy (75 mg/ day) was initiated to supplement aspirin. Over the next eight years, the patient required multiple percutaneous coronary interventions for de novo coronary stenosis and in-stent restenosis. Platelet reactivity measured while on clopidogrel therapy was high, consistent with clopidogrel resistance. CYP2C19 genotype testing then revealed homozygosity for the *2 null allele. The *2/*2 designation indicates poor metabolizer status, indicating deficient capacity of the cytochrome p450 2C19 enzyme for activation of clopidogrel. A medication switch to prasugrel,which does not rely on activation by the 2C19 enzyme, reduced platelet reactivity by 86%. The patient has suffered no cardiovascular events in the 18 months since initiation of prasugrel therapy.

Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients Treated With Systemic Steroids.

BACKGROUND: Chronic steroid therapy is associated with higher vascular complication rates in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The effect of corticosteroids on aortic annular complications has not been directly assessed in this population. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 1095 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR was performed. Patients treated with chronic steroids at the time of the procedure (n = 99) were compared with those who received no steroids (n = 992). The primary outcome included a composite of aortic annular complications, defined as a combination of aortic annular rupture, aortic dissection/perforation, and left ventricular perforation. RESULTS: The primary outcome was significantly higher in the steroid group (4.0% vs 0.5%; P<.01). This finding was primarily driven by higher rates of acute annular rupture in the steroid group (2.0% vs 0.2%; P=.04). Steroid use was associated with higher rates of intraoperative cardiac arrest (5.1% vs 1.5%; P=.03), device capture/retrieval (4.0% vs 0.8%; P=.01), and emergent conversion to open heart surgery (4.0% vs 0.6%; P<.01). There were no differences with respect to in-hospital mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, need for permanent pacemaker, bleeding complications, minor vascular complications, hospital length of stay, hospital 30-day readmission, or 30-day echocardiographic findings. Additionally, within the steroid group, there were no significant differences between balloon-expandable vs self-expanding TAVR prostheses with respect to composite aortic annular complications. CONCLUSION: Chronic steroid therapy increases the risk of aortic annular complications in patients undergoing TAVR, with detrimental consequences including intraoperative cardiac arrest and conversion to open heart surgery. Steroid use should be considered in patient selection and determination of procedural technique for TAVR.

Transcarotid Versus Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (from a Propensity-Matched Comparison).

Previous reports comparing transcarotid (TC) versus transfemoral (TF) approaches for patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement have had inconsistent conclusions. We compared in-hospital and 1-year clinical outcomes, changes in quality of life, and direct hospital costs for 138 TC versus 1,926 TF procedures. Propensity matching based on the Society of Thoracic Surgery Predicted Risk of Mortality was used to compare 130 patients who underwent TC with 813 patients who underwent TF. Matched TC versus TF cohorts did not differ with respect to in-hospital mortality (0.0% vs 1.4%, p = 0.380), stroke (2.3% vs 2.5%, p = 0.917), major vascular complications (0.8% vs 2.2%, p = 0.268), composite bleeding complications (4.6% vs 6.4%, p = 0.647), requirement for permanent pacemaker (14.6% vs 12.9%, p = 0.426), postoperative hospital length of stay (3.3 ± 3.4 vs 3.1 ± 3.3 days, p = 0.467), or direct hospital costs ($52,899 ± 9,560 vs $50,464 ± 10,997, p = 0.230). Similarly, at 1-year, patients who underwent TC versus patients who underwent TF did not differ with respect to all-cause mortality (7.6% vs 6.4%, p = 0.659), hospital readmission (20.0% vs 23.9%, p = 0.635), or quality of life as measured by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score (84.0 ± 17.1 vs 88.4 ± 13.9, p = 0.062). Patients who underwent TC and TF did not differ with respect to in-hospital complications, length of hospital stay, and direct hospital costs, as well as 1-year mortality, readmission, and quality of life. These data add to ongoing support for the TC approach as the optimal alternative access for patients with transcatheter aortic valve replacement deferred from a transfemoral approach.

Transcarotid versus transthoracic access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A propensity-matched analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Transcarotid access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement is emerging as an alternative to more traditional nonfemoral access options such as transapical or transaortic; however, comparative data are limited. The purpose of the study was to analyze outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement using transcatheter compared with transthoracic (transapical/transaortic) access. METHODS: The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry was queried for patients who underwent transcarotid, transapical, or transaortic transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the SAPIEN 3 (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, Calif) transcatheter heart valve between June 2015 and July 2019. Thirty-day unadjusted outcomes were evaluated, and propensity score matching and logistic regression were used to compare transcatheter access with transthoracic access. RESULTS: In the propensity-matched analysis, 667 transcarotid transcatheter aortic valve replacement procedures were compared with 1334 transthoracic procedures. Transcarotid transcatheter aortic valve replacement was associated with lower mortality (4.2% vs 7.7%, P = .004), less new-onset atrial fibrillation (2.2% vs 12.1%, P < .0001), fewer readmissions at 30 days (9.8% vs 16.1%, P = .0006), shorter median length of stay (3.0 vs 6.0 days, P < .0001), shorter median intensive care unit stay (25 vs 47.2 hours, P < .0001), and greater 30-day Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score improvement from baseline (25.1 vs 20.8, P = .007). Stroke (4.3% vs 3.7%, P = .44) and major vascular complications (1.4% vs 1.9%, P = .40) were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement using transcarotid access is associated with lower 30-day mortality, less atrial fibrillation, shorter intensive care unit and overall length of stay, fewer readmissions, greater improvement in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores, and no significant difference in stroke or major vascular complications compared with transthoracic access.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the Use of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in the State of Connecticut.

BACKGROUND: Although prior national reports have identified trends in the underutilization of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in Afro-American and Latino populations, racial and ethnic healthcare disparities in TAVR use in the State of Connecticut have not been previously reported. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 1461 patients undergoing TAVR at our institute between from 2012 to 2020. Baseline demographics, procedural characteristics, clinical outcomes, median incomes and insurance coverage were compared between 1417 Caucasian and 44 minority patients, including 23 patients designated as Afro-American and 10 designated as Latino. Demographics of TAVR utilization at our institution were further compared to 6 additional Connecticut TAVR centers using Connecticut Hospital Association (CHA) ChimeData detailing hospital discharges for DRG 266 and 267. RESULTS: In comparison to Caucasian patients, minority cohorts were younger (75.7 ± 9.0 vs 81.5 ± 5.1 years, p < 0.001) and had more co-morbidities including diabetes (64% vs 34%, p < 001), coronary artery disease (95% vs 78%, p = 0.039), end stage renal disease requiring dialysis (9% vs 3%, p = 0.009) and atrial fibrillation (77% vs 62%, p = 0.041). The two groups did not differ with respect to other risk factors or co-morbidities, baseline echocardiographic or CTA findings, STS risk score, or procedural technique. Minority patients had a longer length of hospital stay (9.5 ± 9.0 vs 6.4 ± 6.9 days, p = 0.003), but did not differ with respect to procedural complications. Socioeconomic differences between the two groups included lower median incomes and higher rates of Medicaid or no insurance coverage for minority versus Caucasian patients. CHA ChimeData revealed a similar underutilization of TAVR in minority subgroups in the remaining 6 Connecticut TAVR centers. CONCLUSIONS: Despite statewide demographics describing 10.7% and 15.7% of the total population as Afro-American and Latino, respectively, only 3.0% of the total TAVR procedures performed at a large Connecticut health care facility were performed in minority subgroups. Despite having a higher burden of co-morbidities, minority patients had similar outcomes compared to Caucasian patients. Similar racial and ethnic disparities in TAVR utilization were confirmed statewide using CHA ChimeData.

Propensity-matched comparison of right mini-thoracotomy versus median sternotomy for isolated mitral valve repair.

BACKGROUND: A right mini-thoracotomy (RT) versus median sternotomy (MS) approach for isolated mitral valve (MV) repair has been associated with less postoperative morbidity, shorter hospital stay, and faster functional recovery, but with consistently longer cross-clamp time and higher operative costs. METHODS: We assessed the impact of a modified operative technique on outcomes in 158 RT versus 129 MS patients treated with myxomatous MV repair from 2016 through 2021. Propensity matching based upon the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Risk Score was used to compare 108 patients in each cohort. RESULTS: Propensity-matched RT patients had reductions in total ventilation time (P=0.025), postoperative atrial fibrillation (P=0.019), and hospital length of stay (P<0.001). RT and MS patients had similar cross-clamp times (66.4±13.7 vs 64.8±16.0 minutes, P=0.414), with less overall leaflet resection (32.4% vs 57.4%, P<0.001) and fewer Gore-Tex NeoChords implanted per patient (1.7±0.7 vs 2.1±1.0, P=0.028) in the RT group. The two cohorts did not differ with respect to 30-day major surgical complications. No patient died and there was no difference between the two groups with respect to freedom from re-operation (98.2% vs 98.2%, P=0.800) at a mean follow-up of 21.4±18.5 months. Direct total hospital costs were lower for the RT group (P=0.018), with reductions in postoperative charges offsetting increased operating room costs. CONCLUSIONS: In this single-center study, the RT compared to the MS approach for myxomatous MV repair resulted in less postoperative morbidity and shorter hospital length of stay, with similar cross-clamp time, reduced total hospital costs, and comparable intermediate outcomes.

Propensity matched analysis of bleeding and vascular complications associated with vascular closure devices vs standard manual compression following percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), controversy exists regarding the effect of vascular closure device (VCD) use on bleeding and vascular complications with limited data available for comparison of the different devices. METHODS: We developed propensity score matched groups, manual compression (MC) (n = 1,407) and VCD (n = 2,814), who underwent PCI in an eight-year period and compared their bleeding and vascular complications. Vascular closure device subtype analysis was also done. RESULTS: Compared to MC, the VCD group had lower rates of hematoma > or = 10 cm (1.1% vs 2.1%, P < 0.01). Angioseal use was associated with the highest rate of surgical repair. Perclose had the lowest rates of bleeding and the lowest composite outcome of all vascular and bleeding complications at 5.6% vs 9.2% forAngiosealand 10.2% for Starclose (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing PCI, VCD use is a safe method for achieving femoral artery hemostasis. Perclose use is associated with the least complications.