Comparing planned versus ad hoc coronary microvascular assessment: Early findings from the Coronary Microvascular Disease Registry.

BACKGROUND: Coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) is an etiology for angina with non-obstructive coronary disease. However, the initial adoption of CMD assessment, whether planned or conducted ad hoc, is limited. We characterize planned and ad hoc CMD assessments and highlight evolving trends of a CMD referral center. METHODS: We analyzed outpatient data from the Coronary Microvascular Disease Registry from 2021 to 2023. Patients were categorized into planned or ad hoc CMD assessment groups, and baseline characteristics, hospital stay, medications, and physiological measurements were compared. Secondary analysis evaluated a CMD referral center's evolution. RESULTS: Of 101 included outpatients, 67.3 % underwent ad hoc procedures and 32.7 % planned procedures. Average age was 63.1 ± 10.1 years. The planned procedure group was 87.9 % female, and the ad hoc procedure group was 51.5 % female. There were no significant differences in index of microvascular resistance or coronary flow reserve between groups. Hospital stay duration was <1 day for both groups, and neither reported complications. Ad hoc patients were more frequently prescribed aspirin before (64.7 % vs. 36.4 %, p = 0.007) and after the procedure (66.2 % vs. 39.4 %, p = 0.01). CMD rates were higher for planned procedures (30.3 % vs. 10.3 %, p = 0.01). We observed that CMD referral centers have more planned procedures and a higher rate of positive results over time. CONCLUSION: CMD referral centers' planned procedures, and subsequent positive cases, increased over time. This emphasizes the importance of planned procedures, appropriate patient selection, and increased awareness of CMD among healthcare providers. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Coronary Microvascular Disease (CMD) Registry, NCT05960474, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05960474.

From chest pain to coronary functional testing: Clinical and economic impact of coronary microvascular dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Coronary functional testing to formally diagnose coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) reduces cardiovascular events and alleviates angina. This study aims to investigate the extensive and complex journey that patients with CMD undergo, from the onset of chest pain to eventual diagnosis. METHODS: Data from the Coronary Microvascular Disease Registry (CMDR) were analyzed, including information on the date of first documentation of chest pain, number of non-invasive and invasive tests the patient underwent, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations. In addition, we estimated the total cost per patient. A total of 61 patients with CMD diagnosis were included in this analysis. RESULTS: Most patients in our cohort were older than 50 years of age. The median time from initial chest pain symptoms to diagnosis was 0.62 (interquartile range [IQR]: 0.06-2.96) years. During this period, patients visited the emergency department a median of 1.0 (IQR: 0.0-2.0) times. Diagnostic tests included 3.0 (IQR: 2.0-6.0) electrocardiograms, 3.0 (IQR: 0.0-6.0) high-sensitivity troponin tests, and 1.0 (IQR: 1.0-2.0) echocardiograms. Prior to diagnosis of CMD, 13 (21.3 %) patients had left heart catheterization without coronary functional testing. Non-invasive testing for ischemia was conducted in 43 (70.5 %) patients. Alternative non-cardiac diagnoses were given to 11 (18.0 %) patients during the diagnostic process, with referrals made to gastroenterology for 16 (26.2 %) and pulmonology for 10 (16.4 %) patients. The cost was almost $2000/patient. CONCLUSION: Timely identification of CMD offers promising opportunities for prompt symptom alleviation, accompanied by reduced visits to the emergency department, cardiovascular testing, invasive medical procedures, and consequently reduced healthcare expenses.

Coronary microvascular dysfunction assessment: A comparative analysis of procedural aspects.

BACKGROUND: Full adoption of coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) assessment faces challenges due to its invasive nature and concerns about prolonged procedure time and increased contrast and/or radiation exposure. We compared procedural aspects of CMD invasive assessment to diagnostic left heart catheterization (DLHC) in patients with chest pain who were not found to have obstructive coronary artery disease. METHODS: A total of 227 patients in the Coronary Microvascular Disease Registry were compared to 1592 patients who underwent DLHC from August 2021 to November 2023. The two cohorts were compared using propensity-score matching; primary outcomes were fluoroscopy time and total contrast use. RESULTS: The participants' mean age was 64.1 ± 12.6 years. CMD-assessed patients were more likely to be female (66.5% vs. 45.2%, p < 0.001) and have hypertension (80.2% vs. 44.5%, p < 0.001), history of stroke (11.9% vs. 6.3%, p = 0.002), and history of myocardial infarction (20.3% vs. 7.7%, p < 0.001). CMD assessment was safe, without any reported adverse outcomes. A propensity-matched analysis showed that patients who underwent CMD assessment had slightly higher median contrast exposure (50 vs. 40 mL, p < 0.001), and slightly longer fluoroscopy time (6.9 vs. 4.7 min, p < 0.001). However, there was no difference in radiation dose (209.3 vs. 219 mGy, p = 0.58) and overall procedure time (31 vs. 29 min, p = 0.37). CONCLUSION: Compared to DLHC, CMD assessment is safe and requires only slightly additional contrast use (10 mL) and slightly longer fluoroscopy time (2 min) without clinical implications. These findings emphasize the favorable safety and feasibility of invasive CMD assessment.

Gender disparities related to clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients undergoing transseptal procedures.

PURPOSE: Explore gender disparities in patients undergoing transseptal puncture (TSP) for selected transcatheter cardiac intervention procedures. METHODS: Patients who underwent TSP from January 2015 through September 2021 were reviewed. Primary outcomes were procedural and in-hospital major adverse events. Secondary endpoints were procedural success and hospitalization length of stay (LOS) >1 day. Unadjusted and multivariable-adjusted logistic regression analyses were performed to assess gender differences for in-hospital adverse events. RESULTS: The study cohort comprised 510 patients (mean [SD] age, 74 [14.0] years); 246 women (48 %) underwent TSP for left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) or transcatheter edge-to-edge-repair (TEER). Compared with men, women were younger, had higher CHA2DS2-VASc scores, and were more likely to have had a prior ischemic stroke, but were less likely to have paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. After multivariable adjustment, there were no differences between genders in aborted or canceled procedures (odds ratio [OR]: 0.43; 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.10-1.96; p = 0.277), any adverse events (OR: 1.00; 95 % CI: 0.58-1.70; p = 0.98), major adverse events (OR: 1.60; 95 % CI: 0.90-2.80; p = 0.11), or death (OR: 1.00; 95 % CI: 0.20-5.00; p = 0.31). Subgroup analysis for LAAO procedures showed that at 30 days, women had higher rates of adverse events, major adverse cardiac events, and LOS >1 day. CONCLUSIONS: Men and women showed no differences in procedural success and in-hospital adverse outcomes in unadjusted analysis and after multivariable adjustment, despite women having a higher risk profile among patients undergoing TSP. However, compared with men, women undergoing LAAO experienced a higher rate of in-hospital adverse events irrespective of TSP.

Utility of an additive frailty tests index score for mortality risk assessment following transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND: The impact of frailty assessment on outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains unclear. Our aim was to evaluate the individual effect of each frailty test and the utility of an additive frailty index score on short- and long-term survival following TAVR. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of consecutive TAVR patients for whom a complete set of frailty tests was obtained: algorithm defined grip strength and 5-m walking tests, body mass index <20 kg/m2, Katz activities of daily living ≤4/6, serum albumin <3.5 g/dL. Frailty status was defined as having 3 or more positive frailty tests. Included were 498 patients with a mean age of 82±8 years. RESULTS: Frailty status, observed in 266 (53%) patients, was associated with both 30-day and 1-year mortality (6% vs. 2%, P=.016; 20% vs. 9%, P<.001; within the respective frailty groups). As compared to 0-2 frailty criteria, a higher frailty index score was associated with increased risk of death at 1 year (OR 2.23; 95% CI 1.14-4.34; P=.019 and OR 3.30; 95% CI 1.36-8.00; P=.008 for 3 and 4-5 frailty criteria met, respectively). In Cox regression analysis, frailty status was correlated with 1-year mortality (HR=2.2; 95%CI 1.25-3.96; P=.007), and a higher frailty index was associated with increased mortality risk (HR=2.0; 95% CI 1.08-3.7; P=.027; and HR=3.07; 95% CI 1.4-6.7; P=.005; for any 3, and 4-5 frailty criteria, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty status and a higher frailty index score were associated with increased 1-year mortality risk following TAVR.

Outcome comparison of African-American and Caucasian patients with severe aortic stenosis subjected to transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a single-center experience.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to report the outcomes of African Americans (AAs) in the US undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for severe aortic stenosis (AS). BACKGROUND: Compared to Caucasians, AAs are reported to have poorer outcomes from most cardiovascular diseases, including high complication rates after surgical aortic valve replacement. The outcomes of AAs undergoing TAVR are not well established. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent TAVR were included in this analysis. Patients' baseline characteristics, procedural data, in-hospital- and long-term outcomes were recorded and a comparison was performed between the AA and Caucasian cohorts. RESULTS: In a cohort of 469 consecutive patients, 51 (10.8%) were AA and 345 (74.5%) were Caucasian. The remaining patients (n = 73; 15.3%) self-reported their race as "unknown" or were from other races. Most baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups except for less men (33.3 vs. 50.1%; P = 0.016), a lower mean left ventricular ejection fraction (48.85 ± 16.35 vs. 53.24 ± 13.41%; P = 0.04) and lower rates of atrial fibrillation in AAs (15.7 vs.45.4%; P < 0.001). TAVR procedures in AAs were less frequently performed as part of a clinical trial (60.8 vs. 76.8%; P = 0.014). Most procedural and periprocedural outcome parameters were similar save for a higher rate of hemodynamic instability and postoperative need for intubation in AAs (10.4 vs. 2.5%; P = 0.018 and 29.4 vs. 16.9%; P = 0.03, respectively). This did not translate into a difference in mortality between AAs and Caucasians (30-day mortality 9.8 vs. 9.9%; P = 0.99; 1-year mortality 19.6 vs. 24.3%; P = 0.458, respectively). CONCLUSION: Unlike with other cardiovascular interventions, this study demonstrates that AA patients referred for TAVR shared similar risks and outcomes when compared to a Caucasian population.

Relation of preprocedural assessment of myocardial contractility reserve on outcomes of aortic stenosis patients with impaired left ventricular function undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is associated with improved left ventricular (LV) function in patients with aortic stenosis (AS) and LV dysfunction; however, the outcome after TAVI of patients with low left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is unclear. This study aimed to characterize the baseline, procedural, and long-term outcomes of patients with low LVEF undergoing TAVI and to assess the prognostic utility of pre-TAVI balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) and dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) to predict TAVI benefits. Consecutive patients with symptomatic severe AS who underwent TAVI from 2007 to 2013 were analyzed. Two groups were compared: normal or near normal LV function (LVEF >45%) and LVEF ≤45% at baseline. In total, 371 patients were analyzed; 272 (73%) had preserved LVEF and 99 (27%) had low LVEF. Patients with low LVEF had higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons score and EuroSCORE. Short- and long-term mortality was similar between groups (1-year rate: 22.2% vs 22.4%, p = 0.79). Of the patients with low LVEF, 24% demonstrated improvement (≥10%) in LVEF at 30 days; patients with improvement had lower mortality at 1 year than those without (8% vs 27%, p = 0.06). Contractile reserve in DSE did not predict LVEF recovery in patients with low LVEF but did predict lower mortality. LVEF recovery after BAV predicted greater LVEF improvement after TAVI. In conclusion, patients with severe AS and impaired LV function benefit from TAVI and have comparable procedural outcomes compared with patients with preserved LVEF. Both DSE and BAV provide complementary data with regard to recovery of LVEF and mortality, both periprocedural and late after TAVI.

Intravascular ultrasound lumen area parameters for assessment of physiological ischemia by fractional flow reserve in intermediate coronary artery stenosis.

BACKGROUND: A fractional flow reserve (FFR) of <0.8 is currently used to guide revascularization in lesions with intermediate coronary stenosis. Whether there is an intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) measurement or a cutoff value that can reliably determine which of these intermediate lesions requires intervention is unclear. AIMS: We assessed IVUS measurement accuracy in defining functional ischemia by FFR. METHODS: The analysis included 205 intermediate lesions (185 patients) located in vessel diameters >2.5 mm. Positive FFR was considered present at <0.8. IVUS measurements were correlated to the FFR findings in intermediate lesions with 40%-70% stenosis. Fifty-four (26.3%) lesions had FFR<0.8. RESULTS: There was moderate correlation between FFR and IVUS measurements, including minimum lumen area (MLA) (r=0.36, P<.001), minimum lumen diameter (MLD) (r=0.25, P=<.001), lesion length (r=-0.43, P<.001), and area stenosis (r=-0.33, P=.01). A receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) identified MLA<3.09 mm(2) (sensitivity 69.2%, specificity 79.5%) as the best threshold value for FFR<0.8. The correlation between FFR and IVUS was better for large vessels compared to small vessels. ROC analysis identified the best threshold value for FFR<0.8 of MLA<2.4 mm(2) [area under curve (AUC)=0.74] in lesions with reference vessel diameters of 2.5-3 mm, MLA<2.7 mm(2) (AUC=0.77) in lesions with reference vessel diameters of 3-3.5 mm, and MLA<3.6 mm(2) (AUC=0.70) in lesions with reference vessel diameters >3.5 mm. CONCLUSION: Anatomic measurements of intermediate coronary lesions obtained by IVUS show a moderate correlation to FFR values. The correlation was better for larger-diameter vessels. Vessel size should always be taken into account when determining the MLA associated with functional ischemia.

A novel, minimally invasive access technique versus standard 18-gauge needle set for femoral access.

OBJECTIVE: To compare access site complications with the Micropuncture 21 gauge (G) needle set to the standard 18G needle in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using the femoral approach. BACKGROUND: Vascular access site complications are the most common problems after PCI. The Micropuncture 21G needle set was recently introduced to minimize such complications. METHODS: A cohort of 3,243 consecutive patients was studied. Patients receiving thrombolytics, IIb/IIIa antagonist, coumadin, or intra-aortic balloon pump were excluded. Micropuncture access was used in 544 patients and standard 18G needle in 2,699. All access sites were managed with a vascular closure device. Primary endpoints included vascular perforation or limb ischemia requiring repair, retroperitoneal bleeding, pseudoaneurysm, arteriovenous fistula, and groin hematoma (>4 cm). RESULTS: Patients undergoing PCI with Micropuncture were at higher risk: they were older (65.9 ± 9 vs. 64.7 ± 11.8, P = 0.03); had lower body surface area (1.9 ± 0.2 vs. 2.0 ± 0.3, P = 0.02); more prevalent peripheral vascular disease [119 (21.9%) vs. 380 (14.1%), P < 0.001] and renal failure [106 (19.6%) vs. 318 (11.8%), P < 0.001]. Overall, there was no significant difference in the access site complications rate using Micropuncture vs. standard needle, 7 (1.3%) vs. 27 (1.0%), respectively, P = 0.54. The Micropuncture group had significantly higher retroperitoneal bleeding, 0.7% vs. 0.18%, P = 0.04. After multivariable adjustment, only age remained significantly associated with vascular complications (OR 1.03, P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Femoral access using the Micropuncture technique did not reduce the incidence of vascular complications and the marginally higher than expected retroperitoneal bleeding is based on very small numbers. The routine use of the Micropuncture set and its technique should be revisited.

Effect of insurance type on adverse cardiac events after percutaneous coronary intervention.

Previous studies have documented disparities in both access to invasive cardiovascular procedures and outcomes in patients with Medicaid, Medicare, or no insurance. Outcomes by insurance have yet not been examined in a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) population. Data from patients undergoing PCI from June 2000 to June 2009 were retrospectively analyzed. Insurance was categorized as private, Medicare, Medicaid, and uninsured, according to the primary insurance at discharge. The outcome variable of interest was major adverse cardiac events (a composite of death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization) at 1 year. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was stratified according to age <65 and ≥65 years. Of the 13,573 patients who had undergone PCI, 6,653 (49.0%) had private insurance, 6,150 (45.3%) had Medicare, 486 (3.6%) had Medicaid, and 284 (2.1%) were uninsured. Of the patients <65 years old, Medicaid (hazard ratio [HR] 1.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04 to 2.43), Medicare (HR 2.18, 95% CI 1.58 to 2.99), and no insurance (HR 2.41, 95% CI 1.36 to 4.27) were associated with greater rates of adjusted major adverse cardiac events at 1 year compared with private insurance. Of the patients ≥65 years old, only Medicaid (HR 3.07, 95% CI 1.09 to 8.61) was associated with a greater rate of adjusted major adverse cardiac events at 1 year. In conclusion, patients with government-sponsored insurance and no insurance have worse cardiovascular outcomes than patients with private insurance after PCI at 1 year. This implies that the provision of health insurance alone might not have a dramatic effect on cardiovascular outcomes after PCI.

Insurance type influences the use of drug-eluting stents.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to examine the effect of insurance type upon the likelihood of receiving a drug-eluting stent (DES). BACKGROUND: Recent guidelines suggest that consideration of a patient's resources should play a role in decisions to use DES. Previous studies have also documented disparities in both access to care and cardiovascular outcomes according to race, insurance, and socioeconomic status. The effect of insurance status upon the decision to use DES is unclear. METHODS: Patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stenting from April 2003 to June 2009, the so-called DES era, were retrospectively analyzed. Multivariable logistic regression was performed separately for patients <65 years and patients > or =65 years, with receipt of > or =1 DES during PCI as the outcome variable of interest. Insurance type was categorized as private, Medicare, Medicaid, and uninsured, based upon the primary insurance at discharge. Data regarding duration of clopidogrel therapy at 1 month, 6 months, and 1 year was also collected. RESULTS: Among the 12,584 patients who underwent PCI with stenting, 6,157 (48.9%) had private insurance, 5,689 (45.2%) had Medicare, 467 (3.7%) had Medicaid, and 271 (2.2%) were uninsured at the time of hospital discharge. There were no significant differences by insurance type in duration of dual antiplatelet therapy at 1 year. Both multivariable logistic regressions showed that Medicaid patients (odds ratio [OR]: 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.46 to 0.78 for age <65 years; OR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.24 to 0.85 for age > or =65 years) and patients without insurance (OR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.78 for age <65 years; OR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.86 for age > or =65 years) were less likely to receive DES. CONCLUSIONS: Insurance status has a significant impact upon the decision to use DES. Efforts to address this disparity should focus on the patient-provider level.

Patient selection--risk assessment and anatomical selection criteria for patients undergoing transfemoral aortic valve implantation.

Currently percutaneous aortic valve replacement (PAVR) is indicated for patients at high surgical risk or for inoperable patients. Preprocedural evaluation is crucial to select the patients who will benefit the most and have the procedure done safely. This review will focus on risk assessment and the value of the available risk score systems, and on the screening process, which is the key for success in PAVR. Because of the large delivery system, careful evaluation of iliofemoral vessels is crucial. It is important to know the amount of atherosclerosis and plaque in the aortic arch and ascending aorta for potential risk for neurological events. Accurate measurement of aortic annulus diameter and coronary arteries origin before the procedure is important. Specific coexistent conditions can influence the procedure, such as left ventricular function or left ventricular hypertrophy with narrow outflow tract. Assessment of all these components is necessary for procedural planning of access approach, valve sizing, and deployment.

Assessment, mechanisms, and clinical implication of variability in platelet response to aspirin and clopidogrel therapy.

Antiplatelet therapy is the mainstay of treatment for patients with cardiovascular disease. However, some patients experience adverse cardiac events despite treatment with single- or dual-antiplatelet (aspirin and clopidogrel) therapy. Some of those events could be caused by low responsiveness to aspirin or clopidogrel. The frequency of this phenomenon has been reported to range from 1% to 45% for the 2 drugs. This wide range arises from the lack of a "gold-standard" definition to assess antiplatelet drug response and differences in assays, agonist concentrations, and cut-off points. Regardless of the variability in the incidence of aspirin or clopidogrel low responsiveness, several studies have indicated a clear relation between clopidogrel or aspirin low responsiveness and cardiovascular events. The evidence for an association between adverse clinical events and the results of ex vivo platelet function tests is stronger for clopidogrel than for aspirin. Currently, there is no established therapeutic approach for managing low response to aspirin or clopidogrel that has been shown in large trials to have clinical benefit. This review focuses on laboratory testing of antiplatelet response to aspirin and clopidogrel, the prevalence of low response, potential mechanisms, clinical significance, and prognostic value of this phenomenon and alternative approaches to optimize treatment in patients with low response to the drugs.