Missed opportunities in medical therapy for patients with heart failure in an electronically-identified cohort.

BACKGROUND: National registries reveal significant gaps in medical therapy for patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), but may not accurately (or fully) characterize the population eligible for therapy. OBJECTIVE: We developed an automated, electronic health record-based algorithm to identify HFrEF patients eligible for evidence-based therapy, and extracted treatment data to assess gaps in therapy in a large, diverse health system. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study of all NYU Langone Health outpatients with EF ≤ 40% on echocardiogram and an outpatient visit from 3/1/2019 to 2/29/2020, we assessed prescription of the following therapies: beta-blocker (BB), angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB)/angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA). Our algorithm accounted for contraindications such as medication allergy, bradycardia, hypotension, renal dysfunction, and hyperkalemia. RESULTS: We electronically identified 2732 patients meeting inclusion criteria. Among those eligible for each medication class, 84.8% and 79.7% were appropriately prescribed BB and ACE-I/ARB/ARNI, respectively, while only 23.9% and 22.7% were appropriately prescribed MRA and ARNI, respectively. In adjusted models, younger age, cardiology visit and lower EF were associated with increased prescribing of medications. Private insurance and Medicaid were associated with increased prescribing of ARNI (OR = 1.40, 95% CI = 1.02-2.00; and OR = 1.70, 95% CI = 1.07-2.67). CONCLUSIONS: We observed substantial shortfalls in prescribing of MRA and ARNI therapy to ambulatory HFrEF patients. Subspecialty care setting, and Medicaid insurance were associated with higher rates of ARNI prescribing. Further studies are warranted to prospectively evaluate provider- and policy-level interventions to improve prescribing of these evidence-based therapies.

Myocardial perfusion imaging in women for the evaluation of stable ischemic heart disease-state-of-the-evidence and clinical recommendations.

This document from the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology represents an updated consensus statement on the evidence base of stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI), emphasizing new developments in single-photon emission tomography (SPECT) and positron emission tomography (PET) in the clinical evaluation of women presenting with symptoms of stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD). The clinical evaluation of symptomatic women is challenging due to their varying clinical presentation, clinical risk factor burden, high degree of comorbidity, and increased risk of major ischemic heart disease events. Evidence is substantial that both SPECT and PET MPI effectively risk stratify women with SIHD. The addition of coronary flow reserve (CFR) with PET improves risk detection, including for women with nonobstructive coronary artery disease and coronary microvascular dysfunction. With the advent of PET with computed tomography (CT), multiparametric imaging approaches may enable integration of MPI and CFR with CT visualization of anatomical atherosclerotic plaque to uniquely identify at-risk women. Radiation dose-reduction strategies, including the use of ultra-low-dose protocols involving stress-only imaging, solid-state detector SPECT, and PET, should be uniformly applied whenever possible to all women undergoing MPI. Appropriate candidate selection for stress MPI and for post-MPI indications for guideline-directed medical therapy and/or invasive coronary angiography are discussed in this statement. The critical need for randomized and comparative trial data in female patients is also emphasized.

Ankle-Brachial Index Testing at the Time of Stress Testing in Patients Without Known Atherosclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Individuals referred for stress testing to identify coronary artery disease may have nonobstructive atherosclerosis, which is not detected by stress tests. Identification of increased risk despite a negative stress test could inform prevention efforts. Abnormal ankle-brachial index (ABI) is associated with increased cardiovascular risk. HYPOTHESIS: Routine ABI testing in the stress laboratory will identify unrecognized peripheral arterial disease in some patients. METHODS: Participants referred for stress testing without known history of atherosclerotic disease underwent ABI testing (n = 451). Ankle-brachial index was assessed via simultaneous arm and leg pressure using standard measurement, automated blood-pressure cuffs at rest. Ankle-brachial index was measured after exercise in 296 patients and 30 healthy controls. Abnormal postexercise ABI was defined as a >20% drop in ABI or fall in ankle pressure by >30 mm Hg. RESULTS: Overall, 2.0% of participants had resting ABI ≤0.90, 3.1% had ABI ≥1.40, and 5.5% had borderline ABI. No patient with abnormal or borderline ABI had an abnormal stress test. Participants who met peripheral arterial disease screening criteria (age ≥65 or 50-64 with diabetes or smoking) tended toward greater frequency of low ABI (2.9% vs 1.0%; P = 0.06) and were more likely to have borderline ABI (0.91 to 0.99; 7.8% vs 2.9%; P = 0.006). Postexercise ABI was abnormal in 29.4% of patients and 30.0% of controls (P not significant). CONCLUSIONS: Ankle-brachial index screening at rest just before stress testing detected low ABI in 2.0% of participants, all of whom had negative stress tests.

Mandatory diagnostic angiography for carotid artery stenosis prior to carotid artery intervention.

INTRODUCTION: Revascularization is an important strategy for reducing stroke risk in patients with severe carotid atherosclerosis. Magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) and/or carotid ultrasound have traditionally been used as the only diagnostic modalities prior to revascularization. Patients undergoing CEA frequently have no further assessments of carotid anatomy prior to surgery. Evaluation with carotid ultrasound and MRA can often overestimate the degree of stenosis. We sought to determine if noninvasive imaging was sufficient for determining whether a patient should be referred for carotid intervention. METHODS: We performed an analysis of 101 patients referred for carotid artery stenting (CAS). All patients had previously been evaluated with carotid ultrasound and 94% had undergone MRA as well. We sought to determine if noninvasive diagnostic imaging for carotid stenosis was sufficient to determine the necessity for endovascular intervention. RESULTS: Of the 101 patients referred for carotid intervention, 36 (36%) were shown to have <70% stenoses and did not require intervention. Of those who had significant disease, 49 (75%) underwent successful CAS, 15 (23%) underwent CEA, and 1 patient was treated medically for a total occlusion. Three of the 36 patients not requiring carotid intervention were found to have subclavian stenosis. Two (4%) of the patients undergoing CAS and 4 (27%) of the patients undergoing CEA had minor complications. No patients suffered a major stroke, MI, or death at follow-up. CONCLUSION: This analysis demonstrates that 36% of patients referred for endovascular intervention based on noninvasive imaging did not meet criteria by angiography. This emphasizes the need for carotid angiography prior to carotid intervention.