Cost savings for pVAD compared to ECMO in the management of acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: An episode-of-care analysis.

BACKGROUND: Acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMICS) occurs in up to 10% of acute myocardial infarction admissions and is associated with high mortality, frequent adverse outcomes, prolonged hospitalizations, extensive medical resource utilization, and major cost. Using hospital cost data for Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) patients with AMICS, we sought to evaluate in hospital and 45-day outcomes and cost, comparing patients treated with percutaneous ventricular assist device (pVAD) versus extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). The goal of this study was to better understand clinical and economic outcomes of AMICS to help clinicians and hospitals optimize outcomes most economically for AMICS patients. METHODS: A retrospective claims analysis identified patients from the full census Medicare Standard Analytic Files compiled by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) including: Inpatient, Outpatient, Skilled Nursing Facility and Home Health files for Medicare FFS beneficiaries. Study costs were defined as the total costs incurred by providers for treating a population with AMICS. Medicare FFS beneficiaries who experienced an inpatient admission during the index period (January 1, 2015 to March 31, 2017) with a diagnosis of AMICS were eligible for study inclusion and were identified by the presence of appropriate International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Versions (ICD-9 and ICD-10) diagnosis and procedure codes. To create a matched sample and control for any baseline differences, a 1:1 Propensity Score Matching (PSM) was performed based on criteria such as age, gender, race, geographic distribution, and 11 high-cost comorbidities (e.g., congestive HF, coronary artery disease, diabetes, etc.). Index length of stay (LOS), index costs, discharge disposition (including mortality), post-index utilization, and episode-of-care (EOC) costs were reviewed. EOC was defined as index admission for all patients plus a 45-day post index period for patients who survived the index admission. RESULTS: Each cohort included 338 patients. Index in-hospital mortality rates were 53% for pVAD versus 64% for ECMO (178 vs. 217; p = .0023), and total EOC in-hospital mortality rates were 66% for pVAD versus 74% for ECMO (222 vs. 250; p = .0160). Index LOS for pVAD was 27% lower versus ECMO (12.12 vs. 16.59; p = .0006). The index LOS for patients discharged alive was 25% lower for pVAD versus ECMO (17.73 vs. 23.62; p = .0016). For patients that experienced in-hospital mortality during their index stay, pVAD had a 44% lower LOS compared to ECMO (7.08 vs. 12.66; p < .0001). Following index hospitalization, the average cost savings with additional inpatient care was 31% lower for pVAD patients ($62,188 vs. $90,087; p = NS). During the EOC, pVAD patients incurred 32% lower costs compared to ECMO patients ($117,849 vs. $172,420; <.0001). CONCLUSIONS: This study of Medicare FFS patients demonstrates that hospitals utilizing pVAD for appropriately selected AMICS patients have reduced mortality rates and reduced index LOS with lower index facility costs and lower post index 45-day costs. The study results offer hospitals and clinicians an opportunity to improve clinical outcomes and reduce total EOC costs in treating patients with AMI complicated by CS.

Expanding opportunities for stent optimization.

Restenosis is reduced but continues to impact optimal late PCI outcomes. FFR post stenting can predict late need for repeat revascularization. Intraluminal Intensity of Blood Speckle measured via Intravascular Ultrasound may provide another method to predict target vessel revascularization.

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.

Stent "Hygiene".

Studies demonstrate ideal Stent expansion with prolonged inflations. Longer inflations, a mediator of greater stent expansion, lower immediate, subacute, and late stent failure. Research should focus on components of stent deployment that optimize early and late stent outcomes.

A comprehensive meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing drug-eluting stents with bare-metal stents in saphenous vein graft interventions.

BACKGROUND: Several large randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have proven the superiority of drug-eluting stents (DESs) over bare-metal stents (BMSs) for native coronary stenosis. However, RCTs comparing DESs with BMSs for SVG lesions have predominantly been small in size and have yielded conflicting results. Therefore, we conducted an updated comprehensive meta-analysis of RCTs comparing DESs versus BMSs for SVG interventions using the largest sample size to date. METHODS: Scientific databases and websites were searched to find RCTs. Data from six RCTs involving 1,582 patients were included. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) were calculated using random-effects models. The primary outcome of this meta-analysis was target vessel revascularization (TVR). The secondary outcomes were major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis, all-cause mortality, and cardiac mortality. RESULTS: Data from six RCTs involving 1,582 patients were included. Saphenous vein graft interventions with DESs reduced TVR (RR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.30-0.88; P = 0.017) and MACE rate (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.42-0.87; P = 0.007) compared to BMSs. No difference between the stents were found in rates of MI (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.43-1.10; P = 0.123), stent thrombosis (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.27-1.41; P = 0.255), all-cause mortality (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.74-1.71; P = 0.554), or cardiac mortality. CONCLUSION: For SVG intervention, the MACE rate was lower for DESs compared to BMSs, driven primarily by decreased non-MI-related TVR. Rates of MI, all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, and stent thrombosis were not different between the stents.

Hemodynamic Support Devices for Shock and High-Risk PCI: When and Which One.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article addresses evolving devices and uses of hemodynamic support in the management of high-risk PCI and AMI with cardiogenic shock. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent publications question the benefit of Intra-aortic Balloon Pump support for AMI Shock. Furthermore, in high-risk PCI, the Impella support system provides better late outcomes than does the intra-aortic balloon pump. We have entered a new era in which larger, higher flow devices that increase cardiac output while unloading the left ventricle provide better outcome. The current PCI population is higher risk, and often without surgical options. Hemodynamic support, most often utilizing Impella support, improves outcomes via providing the hemodynamic stability to allow complete revascularization and optimal lesion treatment. Regarding shock, preliminary data suggests that a concept of early left ventricular unloading before PCI maybe the critical factor for improving the outcome for acute myocardial infarction complicating myocardial infarction.

"Real-World" Comparison of Prasugrel With Ticagrelor in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome Treated With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: The 30-day clinical outcomes with prasugrel or ticagrelor were compared using a US payer database in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND: Prasugrel and ticagrelor demonstrated superior efficacy with increased non-coronary artery bypass graft major bleeding compared with clopidogrel in randomized clinical trials. No direct randomized or observational studies have compared clinical outcomes between prasugrel and ticagrelor. METHODS: Patients hospitalized for ACS-PCI between August 1, 2011 and April 30, 2013 and prescribed prasugrel or ticagrelor were selected. Drug treatment cohorts were propensity matched based upon demographic and clinical characteristics. The primary objective compared 30-day net adverse clinical events (NACE) in prasugrel- and ticagrelor-treated patients using a prespecified 20% noninferiority margin. Secondary objectives included comparisons of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and major bleeding. RESULTS: Data were available for 16,098 patients (prasugrel, n = 13,134; ticagrelor, n = 2,964). In unmatched cohorts, prasugrel-treated patients were younger with fewer comorbidities than ticagrelor-treated patients, and 30-day NACE rates were 5.6 and 9.3%, respectively (P < 0.001). Following propensity matching, NACE was noninferior (P < 0.001) and 22% lower in prasugrel-treated than in ticagrelor-treated patients (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64-0.94). A 30-day adjusted MACE (RR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.64-0.98) and major bleeding (RR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.45-0.95) were also lower in prasugrel-treated patients compared with ticagrelor-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this "real-world," retrospective, observational study, physicians appear to preferentially use prasugrel in younger patients with lower risk of bleeding or comorbidities compared with ticagrelor. Following adjustment, clinical outcomes associated with prasugrel use appear as good, if not better, than those associated with ticagrelor in ACS-PCI patients. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Buzzing the plaque: Coronary rotational atherectomy in its third decade.

Rotational atherectomy enhances successful stenting in high risk, limited option PCI. Independent risk factors for mortality, not surprisingly, include older age, reduced LVEF, renal insufficiency and diabetes. These results support the continued importance of rotational atherectomy to support the growing frequency of high risk, no option PCI patients often with complex calcified lesions.

SCAI Manual of Standard Operating Procedures for Performing Scientific Surveys.

The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (SCAI) endeavors to serve the interventional cardiology community, including both clinicians and patients. The SCAI Scientific Oversight Committee is charged with annually reviewing the scientific needs of the membership at large, including survey-based research of the practice patterns and perspectives of SCAI members and stakeholders. This document is intended as a reference by the survey proponents, document writing groups, external collaborators, SCAI representatives, peer reviewers, and anyone seeking information about the SCAI surveys program. The aims of this SCAI document are to: (1) provide a framework for members to develop survey requests that are relevant, feasible, and align with the Society's missions and goals; (2) promote transparency and clarity for the process of performing a survey through SCAI; (3) establish the criteria for evaluating survey requests and provide input on reliable and meaningful design, data collection, and best practices; and (4) facilitate collaboration and communication between the survey committee and members of SCAI to maximize the impact of the findings to the interventional community at large.

Cardiovascular safety of varenicline: patient-level meta-analysis of randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled trials.

Smoking is a major modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular (CV) disease. Varenicline is a pharmacological aid for smoking cessation. To explore the CV safety of varenicline, we investigated the incidence of CV events in varenicline-treated subjects across all phase 2-4 randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials of ≥12-week treatment duration conducted in smokers aged ≥18 years and sponsored by the drug manufacturer. This manuscript reports a subject-level meta-analysis of time to major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; defined as CV-related death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke) and time to MACE+ (defined as MACE plus worsening or any procedure for peripheral vascular disease, hospitalization for angina, or performance of coronary revascularization). All events were adjudicated by an independent adjudication committee, blind to treatment assignment. Events were assessed during treatment and up to 30 days after the last treatment dose. The primary analytical method was a stratified logrank time-to-event analysis; secondary analyses were meta-analyses of incidence rate ratios and rate differences. Overall, 7002 subjects were included (varenicline: 4190; placebo: 2812) from 15 studies. MACE were reported by 13 varenicline subjects (0.31%) and 6 placebo subjects (0.21%) [hazard ratio, 1.95; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.79-4.82; P = 0.15; risk difference, 0.006 events per subject-year; 95% CI: -0.003, 0.015, P = 0.19]. MACE+ were reported by 26 varenicline subjects (0.62%) and 12 placebo subjects (0.43%) (hazard ratio, 1.74; 95% CI: 0.91-3.34, P = 0.10; risk difference, 0.010; 95% CI: -0.002, 0.022, P = 0.11). This subject-level meta-analysis of MACE or MACE+ up to 30 days posttreatment in placebo-controlled clinical trials of varenicline found a trend toward increased incidence of these events in varenicline-treated patients that did not reach statistical significance. The overall number of events was low and the absolute risk of CV events with varenicline was small.

Strategies for Reducing Vascular and Bleeding Risk for Percutaneous Left Ventricular Assist Device-supported High-risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

In patients at high risk for haemodynamic instability during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), practitioners are increasingly opting for prophylactic mechanical circulatory support, such as the Impella® heart pump (Abiomed, Danvers, MA, USA). Though Impella-supported high-risk PCI (HRPCI) ensures haemodynamic stability during the PCI procedure, access-related complication rates have varied significantly in published studies. Reported variability in complication rates relates to many factors, including anticoagulation practices, access and closure strategy, post-procedure care and variations in event definitions. This article aims to outline optimal strategies to minimize vascular and bleeding complications during Impella-supported HRPCI based on previously identified clinical, procedural and postprocedural risk factors. Practices to reduce complications include femoral skills training, standardized protocols to optimize access, closure, anticoagulation management and post-procedural care, as well as the application of techniques and technological advances. Protocols integrating these strategies to mitigate access-related bleeding and vascular complications for Impella-supported procedures can markedly limit vascular access risk as a barrier to appropriate large-bore mechanical circulatory support use in HRPCI.

Outcomes in patients with chronicity of left bundle-branch block with possible acute myocardial infarction.

INTRODUCTION: Guidelines derived from patients in clinical trials indicate that emergency department patients with likely myocardial infarction (MI) who have new left bundle-branch block (LBBB) should undergo rapid reperfusion therapy. Whether this pertains to lower risk emergency department patients with LBBB is unclear. METHODS: A total of 401 consecutive patients with LBBB undergoing an MI rule-out protocol were included. Left bundle-branch blocks were classified as chronic; new; or, if no prior electrocardiogram (ECG) was available, as presumably new. Left bundle-branch blocks were considered concordant if there was ≥1 mm concordant ST elevation or depression. Rates of MI, peak MB values in MI patients, and 30-day mortality were compared across groups. RESULTS: A majority of patients (64%) had new (37%) or presumably new LBBB (27%). A total of 116 patients (29%) had MI, with no significant difference in prevalence or size of MI among the 3 ECG groups. Myocardial infarction was diagnosed in 86% of patients with concordant ECG changes versus 27% of patients without concordant ECG changes (P < .01). Peak MB was >5× normal in 50% who had concordant ST changes compared to none of those who did not. Concordant ST changes were the most important predictor of MI (odds ratio 17, 95% CI 3.4-81, P < .001) and an independent predictor of mortality (odds ratio 4.3, 95% CI 1.3-15, P < .001); new or presumably new LBBB was neither. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with possible MI with new or presumably new LBBB do not have MI. Concordant ECG changes were an important predictor of MI and death. Current guidelines regarding early reperfusion therapy for patients with LBBB should be reconsidered.

Non-HDL cholesterol shows improved accuracy for cardiovascular risk score classification compared to direct or calculated LDL cholesterol in a dyslipidemic population.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to evaluate the accuracy of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk score classification by direct LDL cholesterol (dLDL-C), calculated LDL cholesterol (cLDL-C), and non-HDL cholesterol (non-HDL-C) compared to classification by reference measurement procedures (RMPs) performed at the CDC. METHODS: We examined 175 individuals, including 138 with CVD or conditions that may affect LDL-C measurement. dLDL-C measurements were performed using Denka, Kyowa, Sekisui, Serotec, Sysmex, UMA, and Wako reagents. cLDL-C was calculated by the Friedewald equation, using each manufacturer's direct HDL-C assay measurements, and total cholesterol and triglyceride measurements by Roche and Siemens (Advia) assays, respectively. RESULTS: For participants with triglycerides<2.26 mmol/L (<200 mg/dL), the overall misclassification rate for the CVD risk score ranged from 5% to 17% for cLDL-C methods and 8% to 26% for dLDL-C methods when compared to the RMP. Only Wako dLDL-C had fewer misclassifications than its corresponding cLDL-C method (8% vs 17%; P<0.05). Non-HDL-C assays misclassified fewer patients than dLDL-C for 4 of 8 methods (P<0.05). For participants with triglycerides≥2.26 mmol/L (≥200 mg/dL) and<4.52 mmol/L (<400 mg/dL), dLDL-C methods, in general, performed better than cLDL-C methods, and non-HDL-C methods showed better correspondence to the RMP for CVD risk score than either dLDL-C or cLDL-C methods. CONCLUSIONS: Except for hypertriglyceridemic individuals, 7 of 8 dLDL-C methods failed to show improved CVD risk score classification over the corresponding cLDL-C methods. Non-HDL-C showed overall the best concordance with the RMP for CVD risk score classification of both normal and hypertriglyceridemic individuals.

Clinical outcomes in patients with acute left circumflex/obtuse marginal occlusion presenting with myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Acute occlusion of left circumflex (LCx) or obtuse marginal (OM) arteries can present as ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). NSTEMI patients (pts) with occlusions have worse outcomes than those without occlusions, but no studies specifically examine outcomes in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) pts with LCx/OM occlusion. This study aims to define the incidence of NSTEMI in pts presenting with LCx/OM occlusion and analyzes clinical characteristics and outcomes in those presenting with NSTEMI compared to STEMI. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A review of our catheterization and STEMI database was performed to identify AMI pts presenting with LCx or OM occlusion from 1/1/2007 to 7/31/2009 at the Medical College of Virginia. Patients were divided into STEMI and NSTEMI groups, and a chart review was performed. Primary end-points were in-hospital mortality (HM), cardiogenic shock (CS), and in-hospital CHF. Secondary end-points included peak CK-MB and time to catheterization, as well as combined end-points of 1-month mortality, and recurrent AMI and CHF. RESULTS: Fifty-six pts met inclusion criteria, 54% of whom presented with NSTEMI. STEMI pts were significantly more likely to meet the primary end-points, as well as the combined secondary end-points. They had shorter times to catheterization but larger infarct sizes. Patients with left or mixed coronary dominance were more likely to have STEMI. CONCLUSIONS: AMI pts with LCx/OM occlusion present with NSTEMI as often as STEMI. Those with NSTEMI have better outcomes, which may be related to right coronary dominance. SUMMARY: Patients with acute LCx or OM occlusion present with NSTEMI as often as STEMI, but those with STEMI have worse outcomes. The difference in presentation may be related to coronary dominance.