Clinical Outcomes and Cost Comparisons of Stent and Non-Stent Interventions in Infrainguinal Peripheral Artery Disease: Insights From the Excellence in Peripheral Artery Disease (XLPAD) Registry.

BACKGROUND: The contemporary limb outcomes and costs of stent-based vs non-stent based strategies in endovascular revascularization of femoropopliteal (FP) peripheral artery disease (PAD) are not well understood. METHODS AND RESULTS: We present data from the ongoing United States multicenter Excellence in Peripheral Artery Disease Registry between 2006-2016 to compare stent vs non-stent treatment outcomes and associated costs in FP interventions. A total of 2910 FP interventions were performed in 2162 patients (mean age, 66 years), comprising 1339 stent based (superficial femoral artery, 93%) in 1007 patients and 1571 non-stent interventions (superficial femoral artery, 85%) in 1155 patients. A growing trend for non-stent based interventions and a declining trend in repeat revascularization rate at 1 year were observed across years of registry enrollment. Stent implantation was the prevailing strategy in treating longer FP lesions (mean length, 152 mm vs 105 mm; P<.001) and chronic total occlusions (65% vs 40%; P<.001), while stent implantation was employed less frequently when treating in-stent restenotic lesions (14% vs 20%; P<.001). Stent and non-stent interventions had similar 1-year limb outcomes in all-cause death, target-limb revascularization, target-vessel revascularization, and major or minor amputation. The average procedure costs for the stent group were significantly higher than the non-stent group ($6215 vs $4790; P<.001). CONCLUSION: There is a growing trend for non-stent FP artery interventions, with a significant decline in 1-year target-limb revascularization rates over time. One-year limb outcomes in stent-based compared to non-stent interventions are similar; however, at a significantly higher procedural cost.

Clinical utility of cerebral angiography in the preoperative assessment of endocarditis.

Cerebral angiography is an invasive procedure utilized without supporting guidelines in preoperative evaluations of infective endocarditis (IE). It is used to identify mycotic intracranial aneurysm, which is suspected to increase the risk of intracranial bleeding during cardiac surgery. Our objectives were to: (1) assess the utility of cerebral angiography by determining which subset of IE patients benefit from its performance; and (2) identify clinical and noninvasive screening tests that can preclude the need for invasive cerebral angiography. Retrospective analysis was performed of all patients treated surgically for IE from 7/2007 to 1/2012 and discharged with medical treatment for IE from 7/2007 to 7/2009 presenting to a large academic center. Of the 151 patients who underwent cerebral angiography, mycotic aneurysm was identified in seven (prevalence=4.6%; 95% CI 2.3-9.3%). Five had viridans group streptococci as the causative IE microorganism (p=0.0017). Noninvasive imaging and particularly absence of intracranial bleed on magnetic resonance imaging conveys a negative predictive value (NPV) of 0.977 (95% CI 0.879-0.996). Absence of a focal neurologic deficit or altered mental status convey a NPV of 0.990 (95% CI 0.945-0.998) and 0.944 (95% CI 0.883-0.974), respectively. Clinical suspicion for mycotic aneurysm and thus utilization of cerebral angiography is likely necessary only in the setting of acute neurologic deficits and when noninvasive imaging demonstrates acute intracranial bleed. A novel association between viridans group streptococci and intracranial mycotic aneurysm is demonstrated.

A direct comparison of early and late outcomes with three approaches to carotid revascularization and open heart surgery.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was a comparison of risk-adjusted outcomes of 3 approaches to carotid revascularization in the open heart surgery (OHS) population. BACKGROUND: Without randomized clinical trials, the best approach to managing coexisting severe carotid and coronary disease remains uncertain. Staged carotid endarterectomy (CEA) followed by OHS or combined CEA and OHS are commonly used. A recent alternative is carotid artery stenting (CAS). METHODS: From 1997 to 2009, 350 patients underwent carotid revascularization within 90 days before OHS at a tertiary center: 45 staged CEA-OHS, 195 combined CEA-OHS, and 110 staged CAS-OHS. The primary composite endpoint was all-cause death, stroke, and myocardial infarction (MI). Staged CAS-OHS patients had higher prevalence of previous stroke (p = 0.03) and underwent more complex OHS. Therefore, the propensity score adjusted multiphase hazard function models with modulated renewal to account for staging, and competing risks were used. RESULTS: Using propensity analysis, staged CAS-OHS and combined CEA-OHS had similar early hazard phase composite outcomes, whereas staged CEA-OHS incurred the highest risk driven by interstage MI. Subsequently, staged CAS-OHS patients experienced significantly fewer late hazard phase events compared with both staged CEA-OHS (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.33; 95% confidence interval: 0.15 to 0.77; p = 0.01) and combined CEA-OHS (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.35; 95% confidence interval: 0.18 to 0.70; p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Staged CAS-OHS and combined CEA-OHS are associated with a similar risk of death, stroke, or MI in the short term, with both being better than staged CEA-OHS. However, the outcomes significantly favor staged CAS-OHS after the first year.

Percutaneous coronary revascularization in coronary artery disease: lessons from a single center experience.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the role of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and its impact on mortality in coronary artery disease (CAD). BACKGROUND: It's unclear whether PCI provides benefit in patients with CAD outside of acute settings. We sought to determine the role of PCI and its effect on mortality in patients with similar entry criteria to prior RCTs and compare outcomes with medical treatment. METHODS: Using institutional diagnostic catheterization database of consecutive patients undergoing coronary angiography from 1/2004 to 1/2010, we examined records for patients with a positive stress test and >70% coronary stenosis or symptoms of angina and >80% coronary stenosis. We excluded those with acute coronary syndromes, low ejection fraction (EF), history of CABG, and CABG following index catheterization. We stratified patients by treatment and performed unadjusted and propensity matched analyses. The outcome was all-cause mortality obtained from the social security death index. RESULTS: We identified 3,375 patients using study inclusion criteria. Mean age was 65 ± 11 years and 69% (n = 2,332) were men. Mean EF was 55% ± 8%. In the unadjusted cohort, 1,265 patients received medical management and 2,110 received PCI. The unadjusted analysis revealed significantly better survival in PCI patients (P < 0.0001) (HR: 0.51; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.41-0.63). Propensity matching was performed for 1,580 patients and analysis showed better survival among patients receiving PCI (0 = 0.04) (HR: 0.74; 95% CI, 0.55-0.98). PCI continued to show better survival after excluding patients with malignancy (P = 0.03) and unstable angina (P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: This single center registry analysis demonstrated better survival in stable CAD patients undergoing PCI compared to medical management alone. These data suggest there may be a benefit of PCI beyond symptom relief. Future randomized trials are needed to further understand the role of PCI in broader patient populations.

Comparison of outcomes of unprotected left main versus multivessel coronary artery interventions.

Left main coronary artery (LMCA) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has emerged as an appealing alternative to bypass surgery for significant LMCA disease, especially in high-risk candidates. PCI for unprotected LMCA stenosis is currently designated a class IIb indication. Direct comparisons between unprotected LMCA PCI and multivessel PCI are lacking. We aimed to determine the incremental risk associated with unprotected LMCA PCI compared to multivessel PCI. We queried the Cleveland Clinic PCI database to identify patients who underwent unprotected LMCA PCI from 2003 through 2009 and compared these to patients undergoing multivessel PCI in the same period. Patients undergoing PCI for acute myocardial infarction were excluded. Mortality was derived using the Social Security Death Index. Short-term (≤30-day) mortality rates in the LMCA PCI group (n = 468, 1.9%) were similar to the death rate in the multivessel PCI group (n = 1,973, 1.3%, p = 0.3). There was no significant difference in adjusted mortality between the 2 study groups. Stratifying LMCA PCI by the number of concomitant vessel territories treated, there was no significant difference in mortality in any LMCA PCI category (LMCA only, LMCA + 1-vessel PCI, LMCA + multivessel PCI) compared to multivessel PCI. In conclusion, there was comparable short-term and long-term mortality in the LMCA PCI and multivessel PCI groups. LMCA stenting did not appear to incur incremental risk compared to multivessel PCI.

Enhanced prediction of mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention by consideration of general and neurological indicators.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to improve methodology for predicting post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) mortality. BACKGROUND: Recently, an increased proportion of post-PCI deaths caused by noncardiac causes has been suggested, often in rapidly triaged patients resuscitated from sudden cardiac death or presenting with cardiogenic shock. Older risk adjustment algorithms may not adequately reflect these issues. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing PCI from 2000 to 2009 were randomly divided into training (n = 8,966) and validation (n = 8,891) cohorts. The 2010 ACC-NCDR (American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry) mortality algorithm was applied to the training cohort and its highest risk decile, separately. Variables describing general and neurological status at admission were then tested for their additional predictive capability and new algorithms developed. These were tested in the validation cohort, using receiver-operator characteristic curve, Hosmer-Lemeshow, and reclassification measures as principal outcome measures. RESULTS: In-hospital mortality was 1.0%, of which 52.2% had noncardiac causes or major contributions. Baseline model C-statistics for the total and upper decile training cohorts were 0.904 and 0.830. The Aldrete score (addressing consciousness, respiration, skin color, muscle function, and circulation) and neurology scores added incremental information, resulting in improved validation cohort C-statistics (entire group: 0.883 to 0.914, p < 0.001; high-risk decile: 0.829 to 0.874, p < 0.001). Reclassification of the ACC-NCDR <90th and ≥90th risk percentiles by the new score yielded improved mortality prediction (p < 0.001 and p = 0.033, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Half of in-hospital deaths in this series were of noncardiac causation. Prediction of in-hospital mortality after PCI can be considerably improved over conventional models by the inclusion of variables describing general and neurological status.