Cardiovascular Risk in Patients with Hematological Malignancies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Patients with hematologic malignancies (HMs) are at risk of future cardiovascular (CV) events. We therefore conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify their risk of future CV events. We searched Medline and EMBASE databases from inception until January 31, 2023 for relevant articles using a combination of keywords and medical subject headings. Studies examining CV outcomes in patients with HM versus controls without HM were included. The outcomes of interest included acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF), and stroke. The outcomes were expressed as hazard ratios (HRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). This study is registered with PROSPERO at CRD42022307814. A total of 15 studies involving 1,960,144 cases (178,602 patients with HM and 1,781,212 controls) were included in the quantitative analysis. A total of 10 studies examined the risk of AMI, 5 examined HF, and 11 examined stroke. Compared with the control group, the HRs for HM for AMI, HF, and stroke were 1.65 (95% CI 1.29 to 2.09, p <0.001), 4.82 (95% CI 3.72 to 6.25, p <0.001), and 1.60 (95% CI 1.30 to 1.97, p <0.001), respectively. The sensitivity analysis of stroke risk based on lymphoma type showed an increased risk of stroke in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma compared with controls (HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.64, p = 0.03) but no significant difference for Hodgkin lymphoma (HR 1.67, 95% CI 0.86 to 3.23, p = 0.08). Patients with HM are at increased risk of future AMI, HF, and stroke, and these findings suggest that CV care of patients with HM should be considered as a growing priority.

Association between cancer, CHA2DS2VASc risk, and in-hospital ischaemic stroke in patients hospitalized for atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is commonly encountered in cancer patients. We investigated the CHA2DS2VASc score, and its association with in-hospital ischaemic stroke in patients with cancer who were hospitalized for AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using the United States National Inpatient Sample, all hospitalizations with principal diagnosis of AF between October 2015 and December 2018 were stratified by cancer diagnosis, type, and CHA2DS2VASc risk categories (low risk, low-moderate risk, moderate-high risk). In-hospital ischaemic stroke and its association with the CHA2DS2VASc risk score was assessed across the groups using hierarchical multivariable logistic regression with adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Discrimination of CHA2DS2VASc score for in-hospital ischaemic stroke was evaluated with Receiver Operating Characteristic and Area Under the Curve (AUC). Among 1 341 870 included hospitalizations, 71 965 (5.4%) had comorbid cancer. Cancer patients had a higher proportion of moderate-high CHA2DS2VASc risk compared with their non-cancer counterparts (86.5% vs. 82.3%, P < 0.001). Compared with their low CHA2DS2VASc risk counterparts, cancer patients in low-moderate and moderate-high risk scores had similar odds of developing stroke (aOR 1.28 95% CI 0.22-7.63 and aOR 1.78 95% CI 0.41-7.66, respectively). The CHA2DS2VASc risk score had poor discrimination for ischaemic stroke in the cancer group (AUC 0.538 95% CI 0.477-0.598). CONCLUSION: Cancer patients with AF have high CHA2DS2VASc risk. Discrimination of CHA2DS2VASc for ischaemic stroke is lower in cancer than non-cancer patients, and CHA2DS2VASc may not be adequate in determining ischaemic risk in cancer population.

Prevalence, characteristics and mortality of cancer patients undergoing pericardiocentesis in the United States between 2004 and 2017.

BACKGROUND: Pericardiocentesis is undertaken in patients with cancer for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. However, there are limited data on the frequency, characteristics and mortality of patients with different cancers undergoing pericardiocentesis. METHODS: All hospitalisations of adult cancer patients (≥18 years) in the US National Inpatient Sample between January 2004 and December 2017 were included. The cohort was stratified by discharge code of pericardiocentesis and cancer, using the International Classification of Diseases. The prevalence of pericardiocentesis, patient characteristics, cancer types and in-hospital all-cause mortality were analysed between cancer patients undergoing pericardiocentesis versus not. RESULTS: A total of 19,773,597 weighted cancer discharges were analysed, out of which 18,847 (0.1%) underwent pericardiocentesis. The most common cancer types amongst the patients receiving pericardiocentesis were lung (51.3%), haematological (15.9%), breast (5.4%), mediastinum/heart (3.2%), gastroesophageal (2.2%) and female genital cancer (1.8%), whilst 'other' cancer types were present in 20.2% patients. Patients undergoing pericardiocentesis had significantly higher mortality (15.6% vs. 4.2%, p < 0.001) compared to their counterparts. The presence of metastatic disease (aOR 2.67 95% CI 1.79-3.97), weight loss (aOR 1.48 95% CI 1.33-1.65) and coagulopathy (aOR 3.22 95% CI 1.63-6.37) were each independently associated with higher mortality in patients who underwent pericardiocentesis. CONCLUSION: Pericardiocentesis is an infrequent procedure in cancer patients and is most commonly performed in patients with lung, haematological and breast cancer. Cancer patients undergoing pericardiocentesis have increased mortality, irrespective of the underlying cancer type.

Management and outcomes of patients admitted with type 2 myocardial infarction with and without standard modifiable risk factors.

BACKGROUND: Whilst it is known patients without standard modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (SMuRF; hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolaemia, smoking) have worse outcomes in Type 1 acute myocardial infarction (AMI), the relationship between type 2 AMI (T2AMI) and outcomes in patients with and without SMuRF is unknown. This study aimed to determine the prevalence, characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients hospitalised with T2AMI based on the presence of SMuRF. METHODS: Using the National Inpatient Sample, all hospitalizations with a primary discharge diagnosis of T2AMI were stratified according to SMuRF status (SMuRF and SMURF-less). Primary outcome was all-cause mortality while secondary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), major bleeding and ischemic stroke. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Among 17,595 included hospitalizations, 1345 (7.6%) were SMuRF-less and 16,250 (92.4%) were SMuRF. On adjusted analysis, SMuRF-less patients had increased odds of all-cause mortality (aOR 2.43, 95% CI 1.83 to 3.23), MACCE (aOR 2.32, 95% CI 1.79 to 2.90) and ischaemic stroke (aOR 2.57, 95% CI 1.56 to 4.24) compared to their SMuRF counterparts. Secondary diagnoses among both cohorts were similar, with respiratory disorders most prevalent followed by cardiovascular and renal disorders. CONCLUSIONS: T2AMI in the absence of SMuRF was associated with worse in-hospital outcomes compared to SMuRF-less patients. There was no SMuRF-based difference in the secondary diagnoses with the most common being respiratory, cardiovascular, and renal disorders. Further studies are warranted to improve overall care and outcomes of SMuRF-less patients.

The association between cancer diagnosis, care, and outcomes in 1 million patients hospitalized for acute pulmonary embolism.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical care provided to cancer patients hospitalized for acute pulmonary embolism (PE), as well as the association between type of cancer, in-hospital care, and clinical outcomes. METHODS: This study examined the in-hospital care (systemic thrombolysis, catheter-directed thrombolysis, and surgical thrombectomy/embolectomy) and clinical outcomes (mortality, major bleeding, and hemorrhagic stroke) among adults hospitalized due to acute PE between October 2015 to December 2018 using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI). RESULTS: Of 1,090,130 hospital records included in the analysis, 216,825 (19.9%) had current cancer diagnoses, including lung (4.7%), hematological (2.5%), colorectal (1.6%), breast (1.3%), prostate (0.8%), and 'other' cancer (9.0%). Cancer patients had lower adjusted odds of receiving systemic thrombolysis, catheter-directed therapy, and surgical thrombectomy/embolectomy compared with their non-cancer counterparts (P < 0.001), except for systemic thrombolysis (aOR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85-1.09, P = 0.553) and catheter-directed therapy (aOR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67-1.00, P = 0.053) for prostate cancer. Cancer patients had greater odds of mortality (P < 0.05). Lung cancer patients had the highest odds of mortality (aOR 2.68, 95% CI 2.61-2.76, P < 0.001) and hemorrhagic stroke (aOR 1.75, 95% CI 1.61-1.90, P < 0.001), while colorectal cancer patients had the greatest odds of bleeding (aOR 2.04, 95% CI 1.94-2.15, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Among those hospitalized for PE, cancer diagnoses were associated with lower odds of invasive management and poorer in-hospital outcomes, with metastatic status being an especially important determinant. Appropriateness of care could not be assessed in this study.

Outcomes and Discriminatory Accuracy of the CHA2DS2VASc Score in Atrial Fibrillation and Cancer.

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is highly prevalent among cancer patients. The role of traditional risk stratification scores in the context of different cancer types in these patients remains unknown. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine the discriminative accuracy of the CHA2DS2VASc score for ischemic stroke using receiver operating characteristic and area under the curve. Methods: The National Readmission Database (2015-2019) was used to identify all AF patients stratified by the cancer diagnosis, type, and CHA2DS2VASc category (low; moderate; high risk). Outcomes at 30-day readmission were compared between cancer and noncancer groups using hierarchical multivariable logistic regression to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% CIs. Results: A total of 6,996,088 AF patients were identified at index admission. Of these, 4,242,630 (642,237 cancer, 3,600,393 noncancer) were readmitted at 30 days. Cancer patients (92.1%) had a higher proportion of high CHA2DS2VASc scores compared with their noncancer counterparts (89.8%, P < 0.001). The 30-day readmission rate and incidence of major bleeding in cancer patients were significantly higher compared with their corresponding noncancer group across all CHA2DS2VASc categories. Among the different cancer types, hematological and lung cancer had a high propensity for major bleeding. The odds of ischemic stroke were lower in the cancer group across high (1.9% vs 2.4%; aOR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.76-0.79; P < 0.0001), moderate (0.8% vs 1.3%; aOR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.50-0.64; P < 0.0001), and low (0.4% vs 0.9%; aOR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.34-0.62; P < 0.0001) risk category relative to the noncancer group irrespective of type of cancer. CHA2DS2VASc category had a statistically significant discriminatory accuracy for ischemic stroke in both cancer and noncancer patients. Conclusions: Cancer patients with AF are at a higher risk of readmission and major bleeding. The risk of ischemic stroke during readmission appears to be lower than noncancer patients. These findings may have implications for anticoagulant therapy in cancer patients.

Post-infarction ventricular septal defect: percutaneous or surgical management in the UK national registry.

AIMS: Post-infarction ventricular septal defect (PIVSD) is a mechanical complication of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) with a poor prognosis. Surgical repair is the mainstay of treatment, although percutaneous closure is increasingly undertaken. METHODS AND RESUTS: Patients treated with surgical or percutaneous repair of PIVSD (2010-2021) were identified at 16 UK centres. Case note review was undertaken. The primary outcome was long-term mortality. Patient groups were allocated based upon initial management (percutaneous or surgical). Three-hundred sixty-two patients received 416 procedures (131 percutaneous, 231 surgery). 16.1% of percutaneous patients subsequently had surgery. 7.8% of surgical patients subsequently had percutaneous treatment. Times from AMI to treatment were similar [percutaneous 9 (6-14) vs. surgical 9 (4-22) days, P = 0.18]. Surgical patients were more likely to have cardiogenic shock (62.8% vs. 51.9%, P = 0.044). Percutaneous patients were substantially older [72 (64-77) vs. 67 (61-73) years, P < 0.001] and more likely to be discussed in a heart team setting. There was no difference in long-term mortality between patients (61.1% vs. 53.7%, P = 0.17). In-hospital mortality was lower in the surgical group (55.0% vs. 44.2%, P = 0.048) with no difference in mortality after hospital discharge (P = 0.65). Cardiogenic shock [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.97 (95% confidence interval 1.37-2.84), P < 0.001), percutaneous approach [aHR 1.44 (1.01-2.05), P = 0.042], and number of vessels with coronary artery disease [aHR 1.22 (1.01-1.47), P = 0.043] were independently associated with long-term mortality. CONCLUSION: Surgical and percutaneous repair are viable options for management of PIVSD. There was no difference in post-discharge long-term mortality between patients, although in-hospital mortality was lower for surgery.

Impact of cancer diagnosis on causes and outcomes of 5.9 million US patients with cardiovascular admissions.

INTRODUCTION: There are limited data on causes of cardiovascular (CV) admissions and associated outcomes among patients with different cancers. METHODS: All CV admissions from the US National Inpatient Sample between October 2015 to December 2017 were stratified by cancer type as well as metastatic status. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) of in-hospital mortality in different groups. RESULTS: From 5,936,014 eligible CV admissions, cancer was present in 265,221 (4.5%) hospitalizations. There was significant variation in the admission diagnoses among the different cancers, with hematological malignancies being principally associated with heart failure (HF), lung cancer with atrial fibrillation (AF), and colorectal and prostate cancer with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Admission with haemorrhagic stroke has the highest associated mortality across cancers (20.0-38.4%). In-hospital mortality was higher in cancer than non-cancer patients across most CV admissions (P < 0.001) with AF having the worst prognosis. Compared to group without any cancer, the greatest aOR of mortality was associated with lung cancer in AMI (aOR 2.32, 95% CI 2.18-2.47), ischemic stroke (aOR 2.21, 95%CI 2.08-2.34), AF (aOR 4.69, 95%CI 4.32-5.10) and HF (aOR 2.07, 95%CI 1.89-2.27). CONCLUSIONS: The most common causes of CV admission to hospital vary in patients with different types of cancer, with AMI being most common in patients with colon cancer, HF in patients with hematological malignancies and AF in patients with lung cancer. Patients with cancer, particularly lung cancer, have greater mortality than non-cancer patients after admissions with a CV cause.

ACEF performed better than other risk scores in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome during long term follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Risk stratification of patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) is an important clinical method, but long-term studies on patients subjected to all-treatment strategies are lacking. Therefore, the aim was to compare several established risk scores in the all-treatment NSTE-ACS cohort during long-term follow-up. METHODS: Consecutive patients (n = 276) with NSTE-ACS undergoing coronary angiography were recruited between September 2012 and May 2015. Six risk scores for all patients were calculated, namely GRACE 2.0, ACEF, SYNTAX, Clinical SYNTAX, SYNTAX II PCI and SYNTAX II CABG. The primary end-point was Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE) which was a composite of cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke or urgent coronary revascularization. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 33 months, 64 MACE outcomes were recorded (23.2%). There was no difference between risk score categories, except in the highest risk group of ACEF and SYNTAX II PCI scores which exhibited significantly more MACE (51.6%, N = 33 and 45.3%, N = 29, P = 0.024, respectively). In the multivariate Cox regression analysis of individual variables, only age and atrial fibrillation were significant predictors for MACE (HR 1.03, 95% CI 1.00-1.05, P = 0.023 and HR 2.02, 95% CI 1.04-3.89, P = 0.037, respectively). Furthermore, multivariate analysis of the risk scores showed significant prediction of MACE only with ACEF score (HR 2.16, 95% CI 1.36-3.44, P = 0.001). The overall performance of GRACE, SYNTAX, Clinical SYNTAX and SYNTAX II CABG was poor with AUC values of 0.596, 0.507, 0.530 and 0.582, respectively, while ACEF and SYNTAX II PCI showed the best absolute AUC values for MACE (0.630 and 0.626, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: ACEF risk score showed better discrimination than other risk scores in NSTE-ACS patients undergoing all-treatment strategies over long-term follow-up and it could represent a fast and user-friendly tool to stratify NSTE-ACS patients.

Socioeconomic Status and Differences in the Management and Outcomes of 6.6 Million US Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Little is known about the impact of socioeconomic status (SES) on management strategies and in-hospital clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and its subtypes, and whether these trends have changed over time. All AMI hospitalizations from the National Inpatient Sample (2004 to 2014) were analyzed and stratified by zip code-based median household income (MHI) into 4 quartiles (poorest to wealthiest): 0th to 25th, 26th to 50th, 51st to 75th, and 76th to 100th. Logistic regression was performed to examine the association between MHI and AMI management strategy and in-hospital clinical outcomes. A total of 6,603,709 AMI hospitalizations were analyzed. Patients in the lowest MHI group had more co-morbidities, a worse cardiovascular risk factor profile and were more likely to be female. Differences in receipt of invasive management were observed between the lowest and highest MHI quartiles, with the lowest MHI group less likely to undergo coronary angiography (63.4% vs 64.3%, p <0.001) and percutaneous coronary intervention (40.4% vs 44.3%, p <0.001) compared with the highest MHI group, especially in the STEMI subgroup. In multivariable analysis, the highest MHI group experienced better outcomes including lower risk (adjusted odds ratio; 95% confidence intervals) of mortality (0.88; 0.88 to 0.89), MACCE (0.91; 0.91 to 0.92) and acute ischemic stroke (0.90; 0.88 to 0.91), but higher all-cause bleeding (1.08; 1.06 to 1.09) in comparison to the lowest MHI group. In conclusion, the provision of invasive management for AMI in patients with lower SES is less than patients with higher SES and is associated with worse in-hospital clinical outcomes. This work highlights the importance of ensuring equity of access and care across all strata SES.