Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Perioperative Health Care Among Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.

There has been little progress in reducing health care disparities since the 2003 landmark Institute of Medicine's report Unequal Treatment. Despite the higher burden of cardiovascular disease in underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, they have less access to cardiologists and cardiothoracic surgeons, and have higher rates of morbidity and mortality with cardiac surgical interventions. This review summarizes existing literature and highlights disparities in cardiovascular perioperative health care. We propose actionable solutions utilizing multidisciplinary perspectives from cardiology, cardiac surgery, cardiothoracic anesthesiology, critical care, medical ethics, and health disparity experts. Applying a health equity lens to multipronged interventions is necessary to eliminate the disparities in perioperative health care among patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Patient Symptoms and Stress Testing After Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the Veterans Affairs Health Care System.

Importance: Up to 60% of patients in the US receive a stress test within 2 years of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), prompting concerns about the possible overuse of stress testing. Objective: To examine the proportion of patients who underwent stress testing within 2 years of elective PCI, proportion of patients who had symptoms that were consistent with coronary artery disease (CAD), timing of stress testing, and site-level variation in stress testing among symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used administrative claims data and clinical records from the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking program. Patients who underwent stress testing within 2 years of elective PCI for stable CAD between November 1, 2013, and October 31, 2015, at 64 VA facilities were included in the analysis. Patients who received stress testing for staging purposes, cardiac rehabilitation evaluation, or preoperative testing before high-risk surgery were excluded. Data were analyzed from June to December 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the proportion of patients who underwent stress testing and had symptoms that were consistent with obstructive CAD, using definitions from the 2013 clinical practice guideline (Multimodality Appropriate Use Criteria for the Detection and Risk Assessment of Stable Ischemic Heart Disease). Secondary outcomes were the timing of stress testing (assessed using a cumulative incidence curve) and site-level variation in stress testing (assessed using multilevel logistic regression models). Results: A total of 3705 consecutive patients (mean [SD] age 66.3 [7.6] years; 3656 men [98.7%]; 437 Black individuals [11.8%], 3175 White individuals [85.7%], and 93 individuals [2.5%] of other races and ethnicities [Asian, Hispanic or Latinx, or unknown]) had elective PCI. Of these patients, 916 (24.7%) received a stress test within 2 years, among whom 730 (79.7%) had symptoms that were consistent with obstructive CAD at the time of stress testing. Visual inspection of a cumulative incidence curve for stress testing showed no rapid increases in stress testing at 6 months or 1 year after PCI, which might coincide with routine clinical visits. The proportion of symptomatic patients who underwent stress testing at each VA site ranged from 67.7% to 100%, with no significant site-level variation in stress testing. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this study suggest that most veterans who underwent stress testing within 2 years after elective PCI had symptoms that were consistent with obstructive CAD. Therefore, measuring low-value stress testing using only administrative claims data may overestimate its prevalence, and concerns about overuse of post-PCI stress testing may be overstated.

Aortic Size and Clinical Care Pathways Before Type A Aortic Dissection.

Patients with aortic enlargement are recommended to undergo serial imaging and clinical follow-up until they reach surgical thresholds. This study aimed to identify aortic diameter and care of patients with aortic imaging before aortic dissection (AD). In a retrospective cohort of AD patients, we evaluated previous imaging results in addition to ordering providers and indications. Imaging was stratified as >1 or <1 year: 62 patients (53% men) had aortic imaging before AD (most recent test: 82% echo, 11% computed tomography, 6% magnetic resonance imaging). Imaging was ordered most frequently by primary care physicians (35%) and cardiologists (39%). The most frequent imaging indications were arrhythmia (11%), dyspnea (10%), before or after aortic valve surgery (8%), chest pain (6%), and aneurysm surveillance in 13%. Of all patients, 94% had aortic diameters below the surgical threshold before the AD. Imaging was performed <1 year before AD in 47% and aortic size was 4.4 ± 0.8 cm in ascending aorta and 4.0 ± 0.8 cm in sinus. In patients whose most recent imaging was >1 year before AD (1,317 ± 1,017 days), the mean ascending aortic diameter was 4.2 ± 0.4 cm. In conclusion, in a series of patients with aortic imaging before AD, the aortic size was far short of surgical thresholds in 94% of the group. In >50%, imaging was last performed >1 year before dissection.

Relation of Guideline Adherence to Outcomes in Patients With Asymptomatic Severe Primary Mitral Regurgitation.

Current guidelines empirically recommend serial clinical evaluations for asymptomatic patients with severe mitral regurgitation (MR). However, there is a paucity of data on the effectiveness of such monitoring. This study sought to examine the potential benefit of guideline adherence among asymptomatic patients with severe primary MR. Asymptomatic patients with severe primary MR who had been evaluated in the Allina Health system between January 1, 2012 and May 30, 2018 were examined. The medical records were manually reviewed for demographics, comorbidities, echocardiographic data, subsequent interventions, and clinical outcomes. Patients were grouped according to occurrence of guideline adherence, which was defined as a serial clinical evaluation with echocardiography every 12 ± 1 month until mitral valve surgery, or death. Over the study period, 246 patients (67.3 ± 15.5 years, 61.4% men) with severe, asymptomatic primary MR were identified, including 154 patients (62.6%) with and 92 patients (37.4%) without guideline adherence. Overall, there were no differences in demographics, morbidities, MR severity, or left ventricular function between patient adherence groups. During follow-up (40.9; 21.2, 58.3 months), patients with adherence more frequently had surgery or transcatheter therapy performed (64.3% vs 18.5%; p <0.001) and the time to intervention was earlier (13.6 [3.9-22.7] vs 44.2[25.6-57.3] months; p <0.001). Compared to non-adherent patients, those with guideline adherence had a significantly higher five-year survival free from all-cause mortality (92.0% vs 74.3%, p = 0.002), and freedom from death or hospitalization for heart failure (90.1% vs 69.3%, p = 0.001). Adherent patients also had a significantly better survival free from combined endpoint of death, re-hospitalization for heart failure, myocardial infarction, and stroke (84.5% vs 63.2%, p = 0.002). In patients with asymptomatic severe primary MR, guideline adherence with serial evaluations every 12 months or less is associated with earlier therapy and improved long-term outcomes. These data support educational efforts to promote guideline adherence.

The impact of a population-based prevention program on cardiovascular events: Findings from the heart of new Ulm project.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) and its associated risk factors are the principal drivers of mortality and healthcare costs in the United States with rural residents experiencing higher CVD death rates than their urban counterparts. METHODS: The purpose of this study was to examine incidence of major CVD events over 9 years of implementation of the Heart of New Ulm (HONU) Project, a rural population-based CVD prevention initiative. HONU interventions were delivered at individual, organizational, and community levels addressing clinical risk factors, lifestyle behaviors and environmental changes. The sample included 4,056 residents of New Ulm matched with 4,056 residents from a different community served by the same health system. The primary outcome was a composite of major CVD events (myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), and CVD-related death). Secondary outcomes were the individual CVD events and procedures. RESULTS: The proportion of residents in New Ulm with a major CVD event (7.79%) was not significantly different than the comparison community (8.43%, P = .290). However, the total number of events did differ by community with fewer events in New Ulm than the comparison community (447 vs 530, P = .005), with 48 fewer strokes (84 vs 132, P = .001) and 42 fewer PCI procedures (147 vs 189, P = 0.019) in New Ulm. Incidence of ischemic stroke was lower in the New Ulm community (1.85 vs 2.61, P = .020) than in the comparison community. Other specific CVD events did not have significantly different incidence or frequencies between the 2 communities. CONCLUSION: In HONU, the proportion of residents experiencing a CVD event was not significantly lower than a match comparison community. However, there was a significant reduction in the total number of CVD events in New Ulm, driven primarily by lower stroke, PCI, and CABG events in the intervention community.

Differences in High- and Low-Value Cardiovascular Testing by Health Insurance Provider.

Background Quality of care incentives and reimbursements for cardiovascular testing differ between insurance providers. We hypothesized that there are differences in the use of guideline-concordant testing between Medicaid versus commercial insurance patients <65 years, and between Medicare Advantage versus Medicare fee-for-service patients ≥65 years. Methods and Results Using data from the Colorado All-Payer Claims Database from 2015 to 2018, we identified patients eligible to receive a high-value test recommended by guidelines: assessment of left ventricular function among patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction or incident heart failure, or a low-value test that provides minimal patient benefit: stress testing prior to low-risk surgery or routine stress testing within 2 years of percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Among 145 616 eligible patients, 37% had fee-for-service Medicare, 18% Medicare Advantage, 22% Medicaid, and 23% commercial insurance. Using multilevel logistic regression models adjusted for patient characteristics, Medicaid patients were less likely to receive high-value testing for acute myocardial infarction (odds ratio [OR], 0.84 [0.73-0.98]; P=0.03) and heart failure (OR, 0.59 [0.51-0.70]; P<0.01) compared with commercially insured patients. Medicare Advantage patients were more likely to receive high-value testing for acute myocardial infarction (OR, 1.35 [1.15-1.59]; P<0.01) and less likely to receive low-value testing after percutaneous coronary intervention/ coronary artery bypass graft (OR, 0.63 [0.55-0.72]; P<0.01) compared with Medicare fee-for-service patients. Conclusions Guideline-concordant testing was less likely to occur among patients with Medicaid compared with commercial insurance, and more likely to occur among patients with Medicare Advantage compared with fee-for-service Medicare. Insurance plan features may provide valuable targets to improve guideline-concordant testing.

Current landscape of hybrid revascularization: A report from the NCDR CathPCI Registry.

BACKGROUND: Hybrid revascularization, combining percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), may be used differently across hospitals. How outcomes compare with multivessel PCI is unknown. METHODS: We studied hybrid revascularization use in patients in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry from 2009 to 2017 who underwent PCI for multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) at 711 hospitals, excluding patients with prior CABG, acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction, emergency/salvage CABG, or PCI without stent placement. In-hospital mortality associated with hybrid revascularization versus multivessel PCI was compared using a multivariable logistic model. RESULTS: Among 775,000 patients with multivessel CAD, 1,126 (0.2%) underwent hybrid revascularization and 256,865 (33%) were treated with multivessel PCI. Although 358 (50.4%) hospitals performed hybrid revascularizations, most (97.3%) performed <1 per year. Most patients (68.7%) treated with hybrid revascularization underwent CABG after PCI; only 79.4% of these patients were discharged on P2Y12 inhibitors. Patients who underwent hybrid revascularization were younger and more likely to have significant left main or proximal left anterior descending disease. Unadjusted in-hospital mortality rates were higher among patients treated with hybrid revascularization than multivessel PCI (1.5% vs 0.9%, P = .02), a difference that was not significant after multivariable adjustment (odds ratio = 1.54, 95% CI = 0.92-2.59). CONCLUSIONS: Hybrid revascularization remains an infrequently used treatment modality for multivessel CAD. Risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality was no different between hybrid revascularization and multivessel PCI; however, patients who underwent hybrid revascularization were less likely to be discharged on P2Y12 inhibitor therapy despite stent implantation.

Causes and Clinical Outcomes of Patients Who Are Ineligible for Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to gain insight into the causes and outcomes of patients who do not qualify for transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR). BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing availability of TMVR, patients with severe mitral regurgitation may not be eligible. Thus far, no investigation has examined ineligible patients and their clinical outcomes. METHODS: A total of 203 patients (mean age 79 ± 9 years, 48% men) who were ineligible for participation in early feasibility studies of TMVR were examined. RESULTS: The ineligibility rate for TMVR was 89.0%. The most common reasons for TMVR exclusion were excessive frailty (15.3%), severe tricuspid regurgitation (15.3%), and prior aortic valve therapy (14.2%). Mitral anatomic exclusions were present in 15.8%, with severe annular calcification in 7.4%, and risk for left ventricular outflow tract obstruction was notably infrequent (4.4%). Overall, 76 patients (37.4%) did not undergo subsequent commercial surgical or transcatheter mitral therapy. Patients not eligible for TMVR and not treated commercially had high rates of cardiac death (11.8%) and death or heart failure hospitalization (22.4%) at 1 year. These rates were significantly higher than those who underwent surgery (2.4% for cardiac death; p < 0.001; 5.5% for heart failure hospitalization; p = 0.003) and remained worse after excluding patients with excessive frailty or medical futility and in multivariate modeling that adjusted for baseline differences. CONCLUSIONS: Patients ineligible for TMVR and treated medically have poor outcomes. These data and the high rate of TMVR screen failure support the need for therapy iteration as well as development of alternative means of management, with the goal of improving the prognosis of these patients.

Incidence, predictors, management and outcomes of coronary perforations.

OBJECTIVES: We examined the contemporary incidence, types, predictors, angiographic characteristics, management and outcomes of coronary perforation. BACKGROUND: Coronary perforation is a rare, but important, complication of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). There is lack of data on perforations stratified as large and distal vessel perforations. METHODS: Retrospective, observational cohort study of all patients who underwent PCI at a high volume, tertiary hospital between the years 2009 and 2016. Angiograms of all coronary perforation cases were reviewed to determine the mechanism, type, and management of perforation. Risk-adjusted periprocedural complication rates were compared between patients with and without coronary perforation. One-year mortality outcomes of patients with large vessel vs. distal vessel perforation were also examined. RESULTS: Coronary perforation occurred in 68 of 13,339 PCIs (0.51%) performed during the study period: 51 (75%) were large vessel perforations and 17 (25%) distal vessel perforations. Most (67%) large vessel perforations were due to balloon/stent inflation, whereas most (94%) distal vessel perforations were due to guidewire exit. Patients with coronary perforations had significantly higher risk for periprocedural complications (adjusted odds ratio 7.57; 95% CI: 4.22-13.50; P < 0.001). Only one patient with large vessel perforation required emergency cardiac surgery, yet in-hospital mortality was high with both large vessel (7.8%) and distal vessel (11.8%) perforations. CONCLUSIONS: Coronary perforation is an infrequent, but potentially severe PCI complication. Most coronary perforations are large vessel perforations. Although coronary perforations rarely lead to emergency cardiac surgery, both distal vessel and large vessel perforations are associated with high in-hospital mortality, highlighting the importance of prevention.

Prevalence, Trends, and Outcomes of Higher-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Interventions Among Patients Without Acute Coronary Syndromes.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Patients and lesions at a higher procedural risk for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are an understudied population. We examined the frequency, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of higher risk and non-higher risk PCIs at a large tertiary center. METHODS/MATERIALS: The following procedures were considered higher risk: unprotected left main PCI, chronic total occlusion PCI, PCI requiring atherectomy, multivessel PCI, bifurcation PCI, PCI in prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) patients, pre-PCI left ventricular ejection fraction ≤30%, or use of hemodynamic support. RESULTS: Of the 1975 PCIs performed from 6/29/09 to 12/30/2016 in patients without acute coronary syndromes, 1230 (62%) were higher risk. Patients undergoing higher risk PCI were more likely to have a history of CABG, myocardial infarction, PCI, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral arterial disease, or congestive heart failure. Higher risk PCIs required more stents (2.0 vs. 1.0, p < 0.001), and had longer median fluoroscopy times (17.3 vs. 8.5 min, p < 0.001) and higher median contrast doses (160 vs. 120 mL, p < 0.001). In higher risk PCIs, the risks for technical failure and periprocedural complications were 2.9 (95% CI 1.2-7.4) times and 2.2 (95% CI 0.9-5.4) times higher as compared with non-higher risk PCI procedures. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, over half of the PCIs performed in non-acute coronary syndrome patients were higher risk and were associated with lower odds of technical success and higher periprocedural complication rates as compared with non-higher risk PCIs. SUMMARY: We examined the frequency, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of higher risk and non-higher risk PCIs at a large tertiary center. Higher risk PCI was associated with lower odds of technical and procedural success and higher odds of procedural complications as compared with non-higher risk PCI. However, the risk/benefit ratio may still be favorable for many of these higher-risk patients and should be estimated on a case by case basis.

Contemporary Reasons and Clinical Outcomes for Patients With Severe, Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis Not Undergoing Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Although aortic valve replacement (AVR) can be lifesaving, many patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis do not undergo appropriate therapy. This study sought to examine the characteristics, outcomes, and reasons for not pursuing AVR in a contemporary cohort. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined 548 patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis not treated with AVR through March 2017. Patients were grouped according to AVR appropriateness based on the presence of medical futility. Demographics, rationale for no AVR therapy, and outcomes were assessed. There were 359 (65.5%) potentially appropriate candidates for AVR and 189 (34.5%) others patients with futility. Among potentially appropriate patients, 62.1% had severe symptoms, 74.4% had not been referred for AVR, and 40.1% were low risk. Patient refusal was common (54.6%), with incorrect symptom assignment or aortic stenosis severity classification accounting for nearly all other explanations. Compared with patients with futility, potentially appropriate AVR patients had lower rates of both referral to cardiology or surgery (85.2% versus 92.6%; P=0.01) and complete heart team evaluations (10.6% versus 17.5%; P=0.02). Palliative consultation occurred in only 124 patients (22.6%) overall and in only 10.0% of those without futility. Overall, the 1-year mortality was 54.7%, with heart failure hospitalization occurring in 19.3%. CONCLUSIONS: In this contemporary study, two-thirds of patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis treated medically were potentially appropriate AVR candidates and had poor outcomes. Most had incomplete heart team evaluations, commonly had severe symptoms or lesion severity misinterpreted, and were not evaluated by palliative care. Given the potential for beneficial outcomes among those untreated, further efforts to address these shortcomings are needed.

Facility-level association of preoperative stress testing and postoperative adverse cardiac events.

BACKGROUND: Despite limited indications, preoperative stress testing is often used prior to non-cardiac surgery. Patient-level analyses of stress testing and outcomes are limited by case mix and selection bias. Therefore, we sought to describe facility-level rates of preoperative stress testing for non-cardiac surgery, and to determine the association between facility-level preoperative stress testing and postoperative major adverse cardiac events (MACE). METHODS: We identified patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery within 2 years of percutaneous coronary intervention in the Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Care System, from 2004 to 2011, facility-level rates of preoperative stress testing and postoperative MACE (death, myocardial infarction (MI) or revascularisation within 30 days). We determined risk-standardised facility-level rates of stress testing and postoperative MACE, and the relationship between facility-level preoperative stress testing and postoperative MACE. RESULTS: Among 29 937 patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery at 131 VA facilities, the median facility rate of preoperative stress testing was 13.2% (IQR 9.7%-15.9%; range 6.0%-21.5%), and 30-day postoperative MACE was 4.0% (IQR 2.4%-5.4%). After risk standardisation, the median facility-level rate of stress testing was 12.7% (IQR 8.4%-17.4%) and postoperative MACE was 3.8% (IQR 2.3%-5.6%). There was no correlation between risk-standardised stress testing and composite MACE at the facility level (r=0.022, p=0.81), or with individual outcomes of death, MI or revascularisation. CONCLUSIONS: In a national cohort of veterans undergoing non-cardiac surgery, we observed substantial variation in facility-level rates of preoperative stress testing. Facilities with higher rates of preoperative stress testing were not associated with better postoperative outcomes. These findings suggest an opportunity to reduce variation in preoperative stress testing without sacrificing patient outcomes.

ACC/AATS/AHA/ASE/EACTS/HVS/SCA/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2017 Appropriate Use Criteria for the Treatment of Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, Heart Valve Society, Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons.

The American College of Cardiology collaborated with the American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, Heart Valve Society, Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons to develop and evaluate Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) for the treatment of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). This is the first AUC to address the topic of AS and its treatment options, including surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). A number of common patient scenarios experienced in daily practice were developed along with assumptions and definitions for those scenarios, which were all created using guidelines, clinical trial data, and expert opinion in the field of AS. The 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines(1) and its 2017 focused update paper (2) were used as the primary guiding references in developing these indications. The writing group identified 95 clinical scenarios based on patient symptoms and clinical presentation, and up to 6 potential treatment options for those patients. A separate, independent rating panel was asked to score each indication from 1 to 9, with 1-3 categorized as "Rarely Appropriate," 4-6 as "May Be Appropriate," and 7-9 as "Appropriate." After considering factors such as symptom status, left ventricular (LV) function, surgical risk, and the presence of concomitant coronary or other valve disease, the rating panel determined that either SAVR or TAVR is Appropriate in most patients with symptomatic AS at intermediate or high surgical risk; however, situations commonly arise in clinical practice in which the indications for SAVR or TAVR are less clear, including situations in which 1 form of valve replacement would appear reasonable when the other is less so, as do other circumstances in which neither intervention is the suitable treatment option. The purpose of this AUC is to provide guidance to clinicians in the care of patients with severe AS by identifying the reasonable treatment and intervention options available based on the myriad clinical scenarios with which patients present. This AUC document also serves as an educational and quality improvement tool to identify patterns of care and reduce the number of rarely appropriate interventions in clinical practice.

Variation in Management of Patients With Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment and Reporting Tool (VA CART) Program.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about facility-level variation in the use of revascularization procedures for the management of stable obstructive coronary artery disease. Furthermore, it is unknown if variation in the use of coronary revascularization is associated with use of other cardiovascular procedures. METHODS AND RESULTS: We evaluated all elective coronary angiograms performed in the Veterans Affairs system between September 1, 2007, and December 31, 2011, using the Clinical Assessment and Reporting Tool and identified patients with obstructive coronary artery disease. Patients were considered managed with revascularization if they received percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting within 30 days of diagnosis. We calculated risk-adjusted facility-level rates of overall revascularization, PCI, and coronary artery bypass grafting. In addition, we determined the association between facility-level rates of revascularization and post-PCI stress testing. Among 15 650 patients at 51 Veterans Affairs sites who met inclusion criteria, the median rate of revascularization was 59.6% (interquartile range, 55.7%-66.7%). Across all facilities, risk-adjusted rates of overall revascularization varied from 41.5% to 88.1%, rate of PCI varied from 23.2% to 80.6%, and rate of coronary artery bypass graftingvariedfrom 7.5% to 36.5%. Of 6179 patients who underwent elective PCI, the median rate of stress testing in the 2 years after PCI was 33.7% (interquartile range, 30.7%-47.1%). There was no evidence of correlation between facility-level rate of revascularization and follow-up stress testing. CONCLUSIONS: Within the Veterans Affairs system, we observed large facility-level variation in rates of revascularization for obstructive coronary artery disease, with variation driven primarily by PCI. There was no association between facility-level use of revascularization and follow-up stress testing, suggesting use rates are specific to a particular procedure and not a marker of overall facility-level use.

Association between statin use, the vaginal microbiome, and Gardnerella vaginalis vaginolysin-mediated cytotoxicity.

BACKGROUND: Bacterial vaginosis (BV) is the leading dysbiosis of the vaginal microbiome. The pathways leading towards the development of BV are not well understood. Gardnerella vaginalis is frequently associated with BV. G. vaginalis produces the cholesterol-dependent cytolysin (CDC), vaginolysin, which can lyse a variety of human cells and is thought to play a role in pathogenesis. Because membrane cholesterol is required for vaginolysin to function, and because HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) affect not only serum levels of cholesterol but membrane levels as well, we hypothesized that statins might affect the vaginal microbiome. METHODS: To investigate the relationship between use of the statins and the vaginal microbiome, we analyzed 16S rRNA gene taxonomic surveys performed on vaginal samples from 133 women who participated in the Vaginal Human Microbiome Project and who were taking statins at the time of sampling, 152 women who reported high cholesterol levels but were not taking statins, and 316 women who did not report high cholesterol. To examine the effect of statins on the cytolytic effect of vaginolysin, the cholesterol-dependent cytolysin (CDC) produced by Gardnerella vaginalis, we assessed the effect of simvastatin pretreatment of VK2E6/E7 vaginal epithelial cells on vaginolysin-mediated cytotoxicity. RESULTS: The mean proportion of G. vaginalis among women taking statins was significantly lower relative to women not using statins. Women using statins had higher mean proportions of Lactobacillus crispatus relative to women with normal cholesterol levels, and higher levels of Lactobacillus jensenii relative to women with high cholesterol but not taking statins. In vitro, vaginal epithelial cells pretreated with simvastatin were relatively resistant to vaginolysin and this effect was inhibited by cholesterol. CONCLUSIONS: In this cross-sectional study, statin use was associated with reduced proportions of G. vaginalis and greater proportions of beneficial lactobacilli within the vaginal microbiome. The negative association between statin use and G. vaginalis may be related to inhibition of vaginolysin function.

Patterns of Resuscitation Care and Survival After In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in Patients With Advanced Cancer.

PURPOSE: Little is known regarding patterns of resuscitation care in patients with advanced cancer who suffer in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). METHODS: In the Get With The Guidelines - Resuscitation registry, 47,157 adults with IHCA with and without advanced cancer (defined as the presence of metastatic or hematologic malignancy) were identified at 369 hospitals from April 2006 through June 2010. We compared rates of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) and survival to discharge between groups using multivariable models. We also compared duration of resuscitation effort and resuscitation quality measures. RESULTS: Overall, 6,585 patients with IHCA (14.0%) had advanced cancer. Patients with advanced cancer had lower multivariable-adjusted rates of ROSC (52.3% [95% CI, 49.5% to 55.3%] v 56.6% [95% CI, 53.8% to 59.5%]; P < .001) and survival to discharge (7.4% [95% CI, 6.6% to 8.4%] v 13.4% [95% CI, 12.1% to 14.8%]; P < .001). Among nonsurvivors who died during resuscitation, patients with advanced cancer had better performance on most resuscitation quality measures. Among patients with ROSC, patients with advanced cancer were made Do Not Attempt Resuscitation (DNAR) more frequently within 48 hours (adjusted relative risk, 1.30 [95% CI, 1.24 to 1.37]; P < .001). Adjustment for DNAR status explained some of the immediate effect of advanced cancer on survival; however, survival remained significantly lower in patients with cancer. CONCLUSION: Patients with advanced cancer can expect lower survival rates after IHCA compared with those without advanced cancer, and they are more frequently made DNAR within 48 hours of ROSC. These findings have important implications for discussions of resuscitation care wishes with patients and can better inform end-of-life discussions.

Referral to Cardiac Rehabilitation After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery, and Valve Surgery: Data From the Clinical Outcomes Assessment Program.

BACKGROUND: Despite guideline recommendations that patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass surgery, or valve surgery be referred to cardiac rehabilitation, cardiac rehabilitation is underused. The objective of this study was to examine hospital-level variation in cardiac rehabilitation referral after PCI, coronary artery bypass surgery, and valve surgery. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed data from the Clinical Outcomes Assessment Program, a registry of all nonfederal hospitals performing PCI and cardiac surgery in Washington State. We included eligible PCI, coronary artery bypass surgery, and valve surgery patients from 2010 to 2015. We analyzed PCI and cardiac surgery separately by performing multivariable hierarchical logistic regression for the outcome of cardiac rehabilitation referral at discharge, clustered by hospital. Patient-level covariates included age, sex, race/ethnicity, comorbidities, and procedure indication/status. Cardiac rehabilitation referral was reported in 48% (34 047/71 556) of PCI patients and 91% (21 831/23 972) of cardiac surgery patients. The hospital performing the procedure was a stronger predictor of referral than any individual patient characteristic for PCI (hospital referral range 3%-97%; median odds ratio, 5.94; 95% confidence interval, 4.10-9.49) and cardiac surgery (range 54%-100%; median odds ratio, 7.09; 95% confidence interval, 3.79-17.80). Hospitals having an outpatient cardiac rehabilitation program explained only 10% of PCI variation and 0% of cardiac surgery variation. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac rehabilitation referral at discharge was less prevalent after PCI than cardiac surgery. The strongest predictor of cardiac rehabilitation referral was the hospital performing the procedure. Efforts to improve cardiac rehabilitation referral should focus on increasing referral after PCI, especially in low referral hospitals.

Use of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy Among Eligible Patients Receiving an Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator: Insights From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Registry.

Importance: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces the risk for mortality and heart failure-related events in select patients. Little is known about the use of CRT in combination with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) in patients who are eligible for this therapy in clinical practice. Objective: To (1) identify patient, clinician, and hospital characteristics associated with CRT defibrillator (CRT-D) use and (2) determine the extent of hospital-level variation in the use of CRT-D among guideline-eligible patients undergoing ICD placement. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter retrospective cohort from 1428 hospitals participating in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry between April 1, 2010, and June 30, 2014. Adult patients meeting class I or IIa guideline recommendations for CRT at the time of device implantation were included in this study. Main Outcomes and Measures: Implantation of an ICD with or without CRT. Results: A total of 63 506 eligible patients (88.6%) received CRT-D at the time of device implantation. The mean (SD) ages of those in the ICD and CRT-D groups were 67.9 (12.2) years and 68.4 (11.5) years, respectively. In hierarchical multivariable models, black race was independently associated with lower use of CRT-D (odds ratio [OR], 0.77; 95% CI, 0.71-0.83) as was nonprivate insurance (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.85-0.95 for Medicare and OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.65-0.82 for Medicaid). Clinician factors associated with greater CRT-D use included clinician implantation volume (OR, 1.01 per 10 additional devices implanted; 95% CI, 1.01-1.01) and electrophysiology training (OR, 3.13 as compared with surgery-boarded clinicians; 95% CI, 2.50-3.85). At the hospital level, the overall median risk-standardized rate of CRT-D use was 79.9% (range, 26.7%-100%; median OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.99-2.18). Conclusions and Relevance: In a national cohort of patients eligible for CRT-D at the time of device implantation, nearly 90% received a CRT-D device. However, use of CRT-D differed by race and implanting operator characteristics. After accounting for these factors, the use of CRT-D continued to vary widely by hospital. Addressing disparities and variation in CRT-D use among guideline-eligible patients may improve patient outcomes.

Use of Contraindicated Antiplatelet Medications in the Setting of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program.

BACKGROUND: Several antiplatelet medications used during and after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are contraindicated for specific patient groups. A broad assessment of contraindicated medication use and associated clinical outcomes is not well described. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using national Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program data for all PCI between 2007 and 2013, we evaluated patients with contraindications to commonly used antiplatelet medications during and after PCI, defined in accordance with package inserts. Adjusted association between contraindicated medication use and outcomes of periprocedural bleeding and 30-day mortality were assessed using Cox proportional hazards with inverse probability weighting. Among 64 294 patients undergoing PCI, 11 315(17.6%) had a contraindication to a common antiplatelet medication and 737 (6.5%) of these patients received a contraindicated medication. In unadjusted analyses, any contraindicated medication use was associated with both increased bleeding and 30-day mortality. In adjusted models, contraindicated abciximab use in patients with thrombocytopenia (hazard ratio, 2.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.58-3.16) and in patients with a previous stroke (hazard ratio, 1.93; 95% confidence interval, 1.37-2.71) remained significantly associated with increased bleeding. Contraindicated abciximab use was not significantly associated with 30-day mortality in adjusted models. Use of eptifibatide in dialysis patients was not significantly associated with an increased risk of bleeding or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In this national cohort, ≈18% of patients undergoing PCI had contraindications to common antiplatelet medications. Approximately 6% of those patients received a contraindicated medication with attendant bleeding risk, although this did not translate into significantly higher risk of 30-day mortality. Continued efforts to reduce contraindicated medication use may help avoid periprocedural complications.