Association Between Cardiovascular Event Type and Smoking Cessation Rates Among Outpatients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: Insights From the NCDR PINNACLE Registry.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear how the type of an atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) event potentially influences patients' likelihood of smoking cessation. METHODS: Using 2013 to 2018 data from the US based National Cardiovascular Data Registry Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence outpatient cardiac registry, we identified patients who were current smokers at a clinic visit and followed them over time for a subsequent ASCVD event. Self-reported smoking status was assessed at each consecutive visit and used to determine smoking cessation after each interim ASCVD event (myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass graft, stroke/transient ischemic attack, peripheral artery disease). We constructed separate multivariable Cox models with nonproportional hazards to examine the association of each interim ASCVD event with smoking cessation, compared with not having an interim ASCVD event. We estimated the relative association of ASCVD event type with smoking cessation using contrast tests. Analyses were stratified by presence versus absence of ASCVD at baseline. RESULTS: Across 530 cardiology practices, we identified 1 933 283 current smokers (mean age 62±15, male 54%, ASCVD at baseline 50%). Among the 322 743 patients who had an interim ASCVD event and were still smoking, 41 336 (12.8%) quit smoking by their first subsequent clinic visit, which was higher among those with baseline ASCVD (13.4%) as compared with those without baseline ASCVD (11.5%). Each type of ASCVD event was associated with an increased likelihood of smoking. Patients who had an myocardial infarction, underwent coronary artery bypass graft (hazard ratio, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.55-1.65]), or had a stroke or transient ischemic attack were more likely to quit smoking as compared with those who underwent elective percutaneous coronary intervention or had a new diagnosis of peripheral artery disease (hazard ratio, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.17-1.22]). CONCLUSIONS: Only 13% of patients reported smoking cessation after an ASCVD event, with the type of event being associated with the likelihood of smoking cessation, prompting the need for patient-centered interventions.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy Versus Aspiration for Tissue Sampling Adequacy for Molecular Testing in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There is limited literature on sample adequacy for molecular testing in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma obtained via endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) fine-needle aspiration (FNA) versus EUS fine-needle biopsy (FNB). We aimed to compare these two modalities regarding sample adequacy for molecular and genomic sequencing. METHODS: We reviewed all patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent EUS at Saint Luke's Hospital from 2018 to 2021. The patients were categorized based on the method of EUS tissue acquisition, specifically FNA or FNB. A comprehensive evaluation was conducted for all cases by cytotechnologists. RESULTS: Out of 132 patients who underwent EUS-guided biopsies, 76 opted for FNA, 48 opted for FNB, and 8 opted for a combination of both. The average number of passes required for FNB and FNA was 2.58 ± 1.06 and 2.49 ± 1.07, respectively (p = 0.704), indicating no significant difference. Interestingly, 71.4% (35) of FNB-obtained samples were deemed adequate for molecular testing, surpassing the 32.1% (26) adequacy observed with FNA (p < 0.001). Additionally, 46.4% (26) of FNB-obtained samples were considered adequate for genomic testing, a notable improvement over the 23.8% (20) adequacy observed with FNA (p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Although the number of passes required for cytologic diagnosis did not differ significantly between EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA, the former demonstrated superiority in obtaining samples adequate for molecular testing. Tumor surface area and cellularity were crucial parameters in determining sample adequacy for molecular testing, irrespective of the chosen tissue acquisition modality.

Derivation and validation of a predictive model for chronic stress in patients with cardiovascular disease.

BACKGROUND: Chronic stress in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD), including peripheral artery disease (PAD), is independently associated worse outcomes. A model that can reliably identify factors associated with risk of chronic stress in patients with CVD is needed. METHODS: In a prospective myocardial infarction (MI) registry (TRIUMPH), we constructed a logistic regression model using 27 patient demographic, socioeconomic, and clinical factors, adjusting for site, to identify predictors of chronic stress over 1 year. Stress at baseline and at 1-, 6- and 12-month follow-up was measured using the 4-item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4) [range 0-16, scores ≥6 depicting high stress]. Chronic stress was defined as at least 2 follow-up PSS-4 scores ≥6. We identified and validated this final model in another prospective registry of patients with symptomatic PAD, the PORTRAIT study. RESULTS: Our derivation cohort consisted of 4,340 patients with MI (mean age 59.1 ± 12.3 years, 33% females, 30% non-white), of whom 30% had chronic stress at follow-up. Of the 27 factors examined, female sex, current smoking, socioeconomic status, and economic burden due to medical care were positively associated with chronic stress, and ENRICHD Social Support Instrument (ESSI) score and age were inversely related to chronic stress. In the validation cohort of 797 PAD patients (mean age 68.6±9.7 years, 42% females, 28% non-white, 18% chronic stress) the c-statistic for the model was 0.77 and calibration was excellent. CONCLUSIONS: We can reliably identify factors that are independently associated with risk of chronic stress in patients with CVD. As chronic stress is associated with worse outcomes in this population, our work identifies potential targets for interventions to as well as the patients that could benefit from these.

Diabetes Care Among Older Adults Enrolled in Medicare Advantage Versus Traditional Medicare Fee-For-Service Plans: The Diabetes Collaborative Registry.

OBJECTIVE: Medicare Advantage (MA), Medicare's managed care program, is quickly expanding, yet little is known about diabetes care quality delivered under MA compared with traditional fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries ≥65 years old enrolled in the Diabetes Collaborative Registry from 2014 to 2019 with type 2 diabetes treated with one or more antihyperglycemic therapies. Quality measures, cardiometabolic risk factor control, and antihyperglycemic prescription patterns were compared between Medicare plan groups, adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical factors. RESULTS: Among 345,911 Medicare beneficiaries, 229,598 (66%) were enrolled in FFS and 116,313 (34%) in MA plans (for ≥1 month). MA beneficiaries were more likely to receive ACE inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers for coronary artery disease, tobacco cessation counseling, and screening for retinopathy, foot care, and kidney disease (adjusted P ≤ 0.001 for all). MA beneficiaries had modestly but significantly higher systolic blood pressure (+0.2 mmHg), LDL cholesterol (+2.6 mg/dL), and HbA1c (+0.1%) (adjusted P < 0.01 for all). MA beneficiaries were independently less likely to receive glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (6.9% vs. 9.0%; adjusted odds ratio 0.80, 95% CI 0.77-0.84) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (5.4% vs. 6.7%; adjusted odds ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.87-0.95). When integrating Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services-linked data from 2014 to 2017 and more recent unlinked data from the Diabetes Collaborative Registry through 2019 (total N = 411,465), these therapeutic differences persisted, including among subgroups with established cardiovascular and kidney disease. CONCLUSIONS: While MA plans enable greater access to preventive care, this may not translate to improved intermediate health outcomes. MA beneficiaries are also less likely to receive newer antihyperglycemic therapies with proven outcome benefits in high-risk individuals. Long-term health outcomes under various Medicare plans requires surveillance.

A combined community health worker and text messagingbased intervention for smoking cessation in India: Project MUKTI - A mixed methods study.

INTRODUCTION: We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of a community health worker (CHW) led smoking cessation intervention, supplemented by text messages, and tailored to an individual's readiness to quit. METHODS: We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial (April 2018-August 2019) in adult smokers residing in a semi-urban region of India. Participants in the intervention arm received CHW-led home visits and had the option of choosing to receive regular text messages. The dose and content of CHW counseling and text messages were tailored to the participant's readiness to quit. The control group received brief education only. Primary outcome was biochemically verified smoking cessation at the end of 12 months. Both intention-to-treat and as-treated analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 238 (mean age 43±12.3 years, male 96.2%) participants were enrolled; 151 (64%) in the intervention arm and 83 (35.4%) in the control arm. At 12 months, 31 (20.5%) participants in the intervention arm and 9 (10.8%) in the control arm quit smoking (absolute risk difference=9.7%; RR=1.69; 95% CI: 0.04-71.33, p=0.74). In the as-treated analysis, 17 (36.9%) of the 46 participants who received optimal dose of the intervention quit smoking. CONCLUSIONS: CHW-led home-based counseling, supplemented by regular text messages, led to an increase in quit rates for smoking, especially among those exposed to a higher dose of the intervention. However, the difference in cessation rates was not statistically significant. Future studies should consider testing mobile application-based multimedia messaging with larger populations, as a supplement to CHW-based counseling.

Comanagement of Risk Factors in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: Insights From the APPEAR Study.

Background Effective management of cardiovascular risk factors is the foundation of secondary prevention in coronary artery disease. The physician under whose sphere these are managed can vary, primary care physicians, cardiologists, or both, and the optimal management strategy for risk factor control is unknown. Methods and Results The APPEAR (Angina Prevalence and Provider Evaluation of Angina Relief) study was a cross-sectional cohort study of outpatients with coronary artery disease (stable angina, percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass grafting, or myocardial infarction) from 25 US cardiology practices. After each patient visit, providers noted who managed each risk factor. Blood pressure and lipid levels were recorded from charts. We compared adherence to guideline-directed risk factor control between management strategies (primary care physician alone, cardiologist alone, or comanaged). Among 1259 outpatients with coronary artery disease (mean [SD] age, 71 [11.1] years; 69% men), blood pressure and lipid management strategy varied. Mean blood pressure was 127.9/72.3 mm Hg, with 74% of patients at <140/90 mm Hg and 46% at <130/80 mm Hg. Mean low-density lipoprotein was 83.5 mg/dL, with 75% of patients at <100 mg/dL and 91% on appropriate statin therapy. Patients managed by cardiologists alone tended to have higher rates of risk factor control for both blood pressure and lipids, even after adjusting for covariates. Conclusions Although comanagement has shown benefit in some clinical situations, we found that risk factor control in patients with coronary artery disease tended to be poorer when care was shared between cardiologists and primary care physicians. Further research is needed to better define which conditions are best comanaged and how to more effectively comanage patients in the fractured US healthcare system.

Health-Status Outcomes with Invasive or Conservative Care in Coronary Disease.

BACKGROUND: In the ISCHEMIA trial, an invasive strategy with angiographic assessment and revascularization did not reduce clinical events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and moderate or severe ischemia. A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status among these patients. METHODS: We assessed angina-related symptoms, function, and quality of life with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at randomization, at months 1.5, 3, and 6, and every 6 months thereafter in participants who had been randomly assigned to an invasive treatment strategy (2295 participants) or a conservative strategy (2322). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate differences between the treatment groups. The primary outcome of this health-status analysis was the SAQ summary score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status). All analyses were performed in the overall population and according to baseline angina frequency. RESULTS: At baseline, 35% of patients reported having no angina in the previous month. SAQ summary scores increased in both treatment groups, with increases at 3, 12, and 36 months that were 4.1 points (95% credible interval, 3.2 to 5.0), 4.2 points (95% credible interval, 3.3 to 5.1), and 2.9 points (95% credible interval, 2.2 to 3.7) higher with the invasive strategy than with the conservative strategy. Differences were larger among participants who had more frequent angina at baseline (8.5 vs. 0.1 points at 3 months and 5.3 vs. 1.2 points at 36 months among participants with daily or weekly angina as compared with no angina). CONCLUSIONS: In the overall trial population with moderate or severe ischemia, which included 35% of participants without angina at baseline, patients randomly assigned to the invasive strategy had greater improvement in angina-related health status than those assigned to the conservative strategy. The modest mean differences favoring the invasive strategy in the overall group reflected minimal differences among asymptomatic patients and larger differences among patients who had had angina at baseline. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ISCHEMIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01471522.).

Health Status after Invasive or Conservative Care in Coronary and Advanced Kidney Disease.

BACKGROUND: In the ISCHEMIA-CKD trial, the primary analysis showed no significant difference in the risk of death or myocardial infarction with initial angiography and revascularization plus guideline-based medical therapy (invasive strategy) as compared with guideline-based medical therapy alone (conservative strategy) in participants with stable ischemic heart disease, moderate or severe ischemia, and advanced chronic kidney disease (an estimated glomerular filtration rate of <30 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 or receipt of dialysis). A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status. METHODS: We assessed health status with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) before randomization and at 1.5, 3, and 6 months and every 6 months thereafter. The primary outcome of this analysis was the SAQ Summary score (ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating less frequent angina and better function and quality of life). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate the treatment effect with the invasive strategy. RESULTS: Health status was assessed in 705 of 777 participants. Nearly half the participants (49%) had had no angina during the month before randomization. At 3 months, the estimated mean difference between the invasive-strategy group and the conservative-strategy group in the SAQ Summary score was 2.1 points (95% credible interval, -0.4 to 4.6), a result that favored the invasive strategy. The mean difference in score at 3 months was largest among participants with daily or weekly angina at baseline (10.1 points; 95% credible interval, 0.0 to 19.9), smaller among those with monthly angina at baseline (2.2 points; 95% credible interval, -2.0 to 6.2), and nearly absent among those without angina at baseline (0.6 points; 95% credible interval, -1.9 to 3.3). By 6 months, the between-group difference in the overall trial population was attenuated (0.5 points; 95% credible interval, -2.2 to 3.4). CONCLUSIONS: Participants with stable ischemic heart disease, moderate or severe ischemia, and advanced chronic kidney disease did not have substantial or sustained benefits with regard to angina-related health status with an initially invasive strategy as compared with a conservative strategy. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; ISCHEMIA-CKD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01985360.).

Prescription Patterns of Clopidogrel, Prasugrel, and Ticagrelor After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Stent Implantation (from the NCDR PINNACLE Registry).

The use of prasugrel and ticagrelor as part of dual antiplatelet therapy is increasing in patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Accordingly, we aimed to evaluate their prescription patterns in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence (PINNACLE) registry. We analyzed patients enrolled in NCDR PINNACLE registry from January 2013 to March 2015 who underwent PCI with drug-eluting stent and were prescribed dual antiplatelet therapy. All patients received aspirin. The primary study outcome was a 3-level variable denoting the second antiplatelet agent prescribed: (1) clopidogrel, (2) prasugrel, or (3) ticagrelor. Baseline characteristics were compared among the 3 groups. Odds ratios and 95% credible intervals were calculated from a nested hierarchical Bayesian logistic regression models to identify independent predictors of prescription of antiplatelet medications, incorporating practice and provider as random effects. Our study cohort consisted of 26,710 patients during our study period January 2013 to March 2015. Seventy nine percent of patients were prescribed clopidogrel, 12% prasugrel, and 11% ticagrelor. Patients aged ≥75 years, women, history of tobacco use, Peripheral Arterial Disease (PAD), hypertension, diabetes, previous vascular complication, heart failure, and stroke/transient ischemic attack were more likely to be on clopidogrel than prasugrel or ticagrelor. The relative percentages of ticagrelor and prasugrel were higher in patients with history of myocardial infarction, compared with those without myocardial infarction. In summary, our study highlights the prescription patterns associated with prescription of antiplatelet agents after PCI. We found that both ticagrelor and prasugrel were mostly prescribed per the current practice guidelines, thus reflecting appropriate guideline adherence by practices in NCDR PINNACLE registry.

Does outpatient cardiac rehabilitation help patients with acute myocardial infarction quit smoking?

Outpatient cardiac rehabilitation (OCR) reinforces patients' efforts to quit smoking, but the association between participation in OCR and long-term smoking status after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is unknown. We studied hospitalized smokers with confirmed AMI from two multicenter prospective registries (PREMIER, from January 1, 2003, to June 28, 2004, and TRIUMPH, from April 11, 2005, to December 31, 2008) to describe the association of OCR participation with smoking cessation. Eligible patients smoked at least 1 cigarette per day on average in the 30 days prior to enrollment and completed 12-month follow-up (N = 1307). Structured interviews were completed on subjects at baseline and during follow-up. OCR participation and abstinence from smoking within the prior 30-days (30-day point prevalence abstinence, PPA) were self-reported. We constructed a propensity model of OCR participation based on 22 baseline sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, and constructed hierarchical modified Poisson regression models of 30-day PPA at 12 months after matching on the propensity for OCR participation (with clinical site treated as a random effect). Seventy-four percent of subjects were referred to OCR at hospital discharge, but only 36% participated during follow-up. At 12-month follow-up, 30-day PPA was 57% in OCR participants, compared to 41% in matched OCR non-participants. Participation in OCR was a significant predictor of 30-day PPA at 12 months (adjusted RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.20-1.57). In conclusion, smokers who participated in OCR were significantly more likely to abstain from smoking 12 months after AMI hospitalization.

Underutilization of Evidence-Based Smoking Cessation Support Strategies Despite High Smoking Addiction Burden in Peripheral Artery Disease Specialty Care: Insights from the International PORTRAIT Registry.

Background Smoking is the most important risk factor for peripheral artery disease ( PAD ). Smoking cessation is key in PAD management. We aimed to examine smoking rates and smoking cessation interventions offered to patients with PAD consulting a vascular specialty clinic; and assess changes in smoking behavior over the year following initial visit. Methods and Results A total of 1272 patients with PAD and new or worsening claudication were enrolled at 16 vascular specialty clinics (2011-2015, PORTRAIT (Patient-Centered Outcomes Related to Treatment Practices in Peripheral Arterial Disease: Investigating Trajectories) registry). Interviews collected smoking status and cessation interventions at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. Among smokers, transition state models analyzed smoking transitions at each time point and identified factors associated with quitting and relapse. On presentation, 474 (37.3%) patients were active, 660 (51.9%) former, and 138 (10.8%) never smokers. Among active smokers, only 16% were referred to cessation counseling and 11% were prescribed pharmacologic treatment. At 3 months, the probability of quitting smoking was 21%; among those continuing to smoke at 3 months, the probability of quitting during the next 9 months varied between 11% and 12% ( P<0.001). The probability of relapse among initial quitters was 36%. At 12 months, 72% of all smokers continued to smoke. Conclusions More than one third of patients with claudication consulting a PAD provider are active smokers and few received evidence-based cessation interventions. Patients appear to be most likely to quit early in their treatment course, but many quickly relapse and 72% of all patients smoking at baseline are still smoking at 12 months. Better strategies are needed to provide continuous cessation support. Clinical Trial Registration URL : https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 01419080.

Clinical Relevance of Rehospitalizations for Unstable Angina and Unplanned Revascularization Following Acute Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: Rehospitalizations following acute myocardial infarction for unplanned coronary revascularization and unstable angina (UA) are often included as parts of composite end points in clinical trials. Although clearly costly, the clinical relevance of these individual components has not been described. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients enrolled in a prospective, 24-center, US acute myocardial infarction registry were followed for 1 year after an acute myocardial infarction for rehospitalizations, that were independently adjudicated by experienced cardiologists. Patients who did and did not experience UA or revascularization rehospitalization were propensity matched using greedy matching. Among 3283 patients with acute myocardial infarction who were included, mean age was 59 years, 33% were female, and 70% were white. Rehospitalization rates for UA and unplanned revascularization at 1 year were 5.0% and 4.1%, respectively. After propensity matching, we included 2433 patients in the UA rehospitalization group and 2410 in the unplanned revascularization group. Using weighted proportional hazards Cox regression, there was no significant association between a rehospitalization for UA and 5-year all-cause mortality (9.6% versus 13.8%; adjusted hazard ratio 0.87, 95% CI 0.60-1.16). Patients rehospitalized for unplanned revascularization had a lower 5-year mortality risk (7.0% versus 15.1%; hazard ratio 0.68, 95% CI 0.50-0.92) compared with those without such rehospitalizations. Nevertheless, patients with UA and unplanned revascularization had a substantially greater hazard of subsequent rehospitalizations compared with patients without such events (UA: hazard ratio 4.36, 95% CI 3.48-5.47; revascularization: hazard ratio 4.38, 95% CI 3.53-5.44). CONCLUSIONS: Rehospitalizations for UA and unplanned revascularization in the year after an acute myocardial infarction are associated with higher risks of subsequent rehospitalizations but not with mortality.

Frequency of Poor Outcome (Death or Poor Quality of Life) After Left Ventricular Assist Device for Destination Therapy: Results From the INTERMACS Registry.

BACKGROUND: A left ventricular assist device (LVAD) improves survival and quality of life for many, but not all, patients with end-stage heart failure who are ineligible for transplantation. We sought to evaluate the frequency of poor outcomes using a novel composite measure that integrates quality of life with mortality. METHODS AND RESULTS: Within the INTERMACS (Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support) national registry, poor outcome was defined as death or an average Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire <45 during the year after LVAD (persistently limiting heart failure symptoms and poor quality of life). Among 1638 patients with LVAD, 29.7% had a poor outcome, with death in 22.4% and persistently poor quality of life in 7.3%. Patients who had a poor outcome were more likely to have higher body mass indices (29.3 versus 28.2 kg/m(2); P=0.007), lower hemoglobin levels (11.1 versus 11.4 g/dL; P=0.005), previous cardiac surgery (47.8% versus 39.8%; P=0.004), history of cancer (13.8% versus 9.7%; P=0.025), severe diabetes mellitus (15.6% versus 11.5%; P=0.038), and poorer quality of life preimplant (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores: 29.8 versus 35.3; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly one third of patients die or have a persistently poor quality of life during the year after LVAD. We identified several factors associated with a poor outcome, which may inform discussions before LVAD implantation to enable more realistic expectations of recovery.

Predicting Adverse Outcomes After Myocardial Infarction Among Patients With Diabetes Mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Although patients with diabetes mellitus experience high rates of adverse events after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), including death and recurrent ischemia, some diabetic patients are likely at low risk, whereas others are at high risk. We sought to develop prediction models to stratify risk after AMI in patients with diabetes mellitus. METHODS AND RESULTS: We developed prediction models for long-term mortality and angina among 1613 patients with diabetes mellitus discharged alive after AMI from 24 US hospitals and then validated the models in a separate, multicenter registry of 786 patients with diabetes mellitus. Event rates in the derivation cohort were 27% for 5-year mortality and 27% for 1-year angina. Parsimonious prediction models demonstrated good discrimination (c-indices=0.78 and 0.69, respectively) and excellent calibration. Within the context of the predictors we estimated, the strongest predictors for mortality were higher creatinine, not working at the time of the AMI, older age, lower hemoglobin, left ventricular dysfunction, and chronic heart failure. The strongest predictors for angina were angina burden in the 4 weeks before the AMI, younger age, history of prior coronary bypass graft surgery, and non-white race. The lowest and highest deciles of predicted risk ranged from 4% to 80% for mortality and 12% to 59% for angina. The models also performed well in external validation (c-indices=0.78 and 0.73, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We found a wide range of risk for adverse outcomes after AMI in diabetic patients. Predictive models can identify patients with diabetes mellitus for whom closer follow-up and aggressive secondary prevention strategies should be considered.

Association of Smoking Status With Angina and Health-Related Quality of Life After Acute Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: Smoking cessation after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) decreases the risk of recurrent AMI and mortality by 30% to 50%, but many patients continue to smoke. The association of smoking with angina and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) after AMI is unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients in 2 US multicenter AMI registries (n=4003) were assessed for smoking and HRQOL at admission and 1, 6, and 12 months after AMI. Angina and HRQOL were measured with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire and Short Form-12 Physical and Mental Component Scales. At admission, 29% never had smoked, 34% were former smokers (quit before AMI), and 37% were active smokers, of whom 46% quit by 1 year (recent quitters). In hierarchical, multivariable, regression models that adjusted for sociodemographic, clinical and treatment factors, never and former smokers had similar and the best HRQOL in all domains. Recent quitters had intermediate HRQOL levels, with angina and Short Form-12 Mental Component Scale scores similar to never smokers. Persistent smokers had worse HRQOL in all domains compared with never smokers and worse Short Form-12 Mental Component Scale scores than recent quitters. CONCLUSIONS: Smoking after AMI is associated with more angina and worse HRQOL in all domains, whereas smokers who quit after AMI have similar angina levels and mental health as never smokers. These observations may help encourage patients to stop smoking after AMI.

Association of smoking status with health-related outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: Patients who smoke at the time of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) would ideally have a strong incentive to quit, but most do not. We sought to compare the health status outcomes of those who did and did not quit smoking after PCI with those who were not smoking before PCI. METHODS AND RESULTS: A cohort of 2765 PCI patients from 10 US centers were categorized into never, past (smoked in the past but had quit before PCI), quitters (smoked at time of PCI but then quit), and persistent smokers. Health status was measured with the disease-specific Seattle Angina Questionnaire and the EuroQol 5 dimensions, adjusted for baseline characteristics. In unadjusted analyses, persistent smokers had worse disease-specific and overall health status when compared with other groups. In fully adjusted analyses, persistent smokers showed significantly worse health-related quality of life when compared with never smokers. Importantly, of those who smoked at the time of PCI, quitters had significantly better adjusted Seattle Angina Questionnaire angina frequency scores (mean difference, 2.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-5.33) and trends toward higher disease specific (Seattle Angina Questionnaire quality of life mean difference, 1.97; 95% confidence interval, -1.24 to 5.18), and overall (EuroQol 5 dimension visual analog scale scores mean difference, 2.45; 95% confidence interval, -0.58 to 5.49) quality of life when compared with persistent smokers at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Smokers at the time of PCI have worse health status at 1 year than those who never smoked, whereas smokers who quit after PCI have less angina at 1 year than those who continue smoking.

Recognition of incident diabetes mellitus during an acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is common in patients hospitalized with an acute myocardial infarction (AMI), representing in some cases the first opportunity to recognize and treat DM. We report the incidence of new DM and its recognition among patients with AMI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients in a 24-site US AMI registry (2005-08) had glycosylated hemoglobin assessed at a core laboratory, with results blinded to clinicians and local clinical measurements left to the discretion of the treating providers. Among 2854 AMI patients without known DM on admission, 287 patients (10%) met criteria for previously unknown DM, defined by a core laboratory glycosylated hemoglobin of ≥6.5%. Among these, 186 (65%) were unrecognized by treating clinicians, receiving neither DM education, glucose-lowering medications at discharge, nor documentation of DM in the chart (median glycosylated hemoglobin of unrecognized patients, 6.7%; range, 6.5-12.3%). Six months after discharge, only 5% of those not recognized as having DM during hospitalization had been initiated on glucose-lowering medications versus 66% of those recognized (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Underlying DM that has not been previously diagnosed is common among AMI patients, affecting 1 in 10 patients, yet is recognized by the care team only one third of the time. Given its frequency and therapeutic implications, including but extending beyond the initiation of glucose-lowering treatment, consideration should be given to screening all AMI patients for DM during hospitalization. Inexpensive, ubiquitous, and endorsed as an acceptable screen for DM, glycosylated hemoglobin testing should be considered for this purpose.

Risk factors for rehospitalization for acute coronary syndromes and unplanned revascularization following acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Rehospitalizations for acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and coronary revascularization after an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are not only common and costly but can also impact patients' quality of life. In contrast to mortality and all-cause readmissions, little insight is available into risk factors associated with ACS and revascularization after AMI. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a multicenter AMI registry, we examined the rates and predictors of rehospitalizations for ACS and revascularization within the year after AMI among 3283 patients. Staged revascularization procedures were excluded. Kaplan-Meier estimated rates of rehospitalization due to ACS and revascularization were 6.8% and 4.1%, respectively. In hierarchical, multivariable models, the strongest predictors of rehospitalization for ACS were coronary artery bypass graft prior to AMI hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR] 2.12, 95% CI 1.45 to 3.10), female sex (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.25), and in-hospital PCI (HR 1.85, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.69). The strongest predictors of subsequent revascularization were multivessel disease (HR 2.89, 95% CI 1.90 to 4.39) and in-hospital percutaneous coronary intervention with a bare metal stent (HR 2.08, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.63). The Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events mortality risk score was not associated with the risk of rehospitalization for ACS or revascularization. CONCLUSIONS: Unique characteristics are associated with admissions for ACS and revascularization, as compared with survival. These multivariable risk predictors may help identify patients at high risk for ACS and revascularization, in whom intensification of secondary prevention therapies or closer post-AMI follow-up may be warranted.

Cost, quality, and value in coronary artery bypass grafting.

OBJECTIVE: Pay-for-performance measures, part of the Affordable Care Act, aim to reduce health care costs by linking value with Medicare payments, but until now the concept of value has not been applied to specific procedures. We sought to define value in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and provide a framework to identify high-value centers. METHODS: In a multiinstitutional statewide database, clinical patient-level data from 42,839 patients undergoing CABG were matched with cost data. Hierarchical models adjusting for relevant preoperative patient characteristics and comorbidities were used to estimate center-specific risk-adjusted costs and risk-adjusted postoperative length of stay. Variation in value across centers was assessed by the correlation between risk-adjusted measures of quality (mortality, morbidity/mortality) and resource use (costs and length of stay). RESULTS: There were no significant correlations between risk-adjusted costs and risk-adjusted mortality (r = 0.20, P = .45) or morbidity/mortality (r = 0.15, P = .57) across centers. Risk-adjusted costs and length of stay were not significantly associated (r = 0.23, P = .37) because of cost accounting differences across centers. This may explain the lack of correlation between risk-adjusted quality and risk-adjusted cost measures. When risk-adjusted length of stay and morbidity/mortality were used for the framework, there was a strong positive correlation (r = 0.67, P = .003), indicating that higher risk-adjusted quality is associated with shorter risk-adjusted length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Risk-adjusted length of stay and risk-adjusted combined morbidity/mortality are important outcome measures for assessing value in cardiac surgery. The proposed framework can be used to define value in CABG and identify high-value centers, thereby providing information for quality improvement and pay-for-performance initiatives.

Prediction of costs and length of stay in coronary artery bypass grafting.

BACKGROUND: Although more than 200,000 bypass operations are performed in the United States annually, few data exist on the predictors of costs and resource use for this procedure. Questions related to clinical outcomes, costs, and resource use in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) were addressed. METHODS: In a multiinstitutional statewide database, patient level data from 42,839 patients undergoing isolated CABG were combined with cost data. After adjustment for cost-to-charge ratios and inflation, the association of length of stay and costs with the Society of Thoracic Surgeons-Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS-PROM) was analyzed. Patients were randomly divided into development (60%) and validation (40%) cohorts. Regression models were developed to analyze the impact of patient characteristics, comorbidities, and adverse events on postoperative length of stay and total costs. RESULTS: Postoperative length of stay and total direct costs for CABG averaged 6.9 days and $38,847. Length of stay and costs increased from 5.4 days and $33,275 in the lowest-risk decile (mean STS-PROM of 0.6%) to 13.8 days and $69,122 in the highest-risk decile (mean STS-PROM 19%). Compared with adverse events, patient characteristics had little impact on length of stay and costs. on validation, the models that combined preoperative and postoperative variables explained variance better (R(2) = 0.51 for length of stay; R(2) = 0.47 for costs) and were better calibrated than the preoperative models (R(2) = 0.10 for length of stay; R(2) = 0.14 for costs). CONCLUSIONS: The STS-PROM and preoperative regression models are useful for preoperative prediction of costs and length of stay for groups of patients, case-mix adjustment in hospital benchmarking, and pay for performance measures. The combined preoperative and postoperative models identify incremental costs and length of stay associated with adverse events and are more suitable for prioritizing quality improvement efforts.