Extract from the 2022 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular assessment and management of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery - Patient Blood Management.

The 2022 Guidelines on cardiovascular assessment and management of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery of the European Society of Cardiology are an update on the previous guidelines reported in 2014. The revised guidelines provide standardized perioperative cardiovascular management of surgical patients and emphasis on risk assessment of the patient combined with the inherent risk of the surgical procedure. One of the novelties in these guidelines is the Patient Blood Management programme, which is based on a three pillar concept: preoperative hemoglobin optimization, minimize iatrogenic blood loss and bleeding, and harness tolerance to anemia in an effort to improve patient outcome. In this review, we highlight the three pillars of Patient Blood Management and recommendations made by the 2022 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular assessment and management of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery.

European Society of Cardiology quality indicators for the cardiovascular pre-operative assessment and management of patients considered for non-cardiac surgery. Developed in collaboration with the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care.

AIMS: To establish a set of quality indicators (QIs) for the cardiovascular (CV) assessment and management of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery (NCS). METHODS AND RESULTS: The Quality Indicator Committee of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) in collaboration with Task Force members of the 2022 ESC Guidelines on CV assessment and management of patients undergoing NCS followed the ESC methodology for QI development. This included (1) identification, by constructing a conceptual framework of care, of domains of the CV assessment, and management of patients with risk factors or established cardiovascular disease (CVD) who are considered for or undergoing NCS, (2) development of candidate QIs following a systematic literature review, (3) selection of the final set of QIs using a modified Delphi method, and (4) evaluation of the feasibility of the developed QIs. In total, eight main and nine secondary QIs were selected across six domains: (1) structural framework (written policy), (2) patient education and quality of life (CV risk discussion), (3) peri-operative risk assessment (indication for diagnostic tests), (4) peri-operative risk mitigation (use of hospital therapies), (5) follow-up (post-discharge assessment), and (6) outcomes (major CV events). CONCLUSION: We present the 2022 ESC/ESAIC QIs for the CV assessment and management of patients with risk factors or established CVD who are considered for or are undergoing NCS y. These indicators are supported by evidence from the literature, underpinned by expert consensus, and align with the 2022 ESC Guidelines on CV assessment and management of patients undergoing NCS.

Cost-effectiveness of a rule-out algorithm of acute myocardial infarction in low-risk patients: emergency primary care versus hospital setting.

AIMS: Hospital admissions of patients with chest pain considered as low risk for acute coronary syndrome contribute to increased costs and crowding in the emergency departments. This study aims to estimate the cost-effectiveness of assessing these patients in a primary care emergency setting, using the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) 0/1-h algorithm for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T, compared to routine hospital management. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted. For the primary care estimates, costs and health care expenditure from the observational OUT-ACS (One-hoUr Troponin in a low-prevalence population of Acute Coronary Syndrome) study were compared with anonymous extracted administrative data on low-risk patients at a large general hospital in Norway. Patients discharged home after the hs-cTnT assessment were defined as low risk in the primary care cohort. In the hospital setting, the low-risk group comprised patients discharged with a non-specific chest pain diagnosis (ICD-10 codes R07.4 and Z03.5). Loss of health related to a potential increase in acute myocardial infarctions the following 30-days was estimated. The primary outcome measure was the costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) of applying the ESC 0/1-h algorithm in primary care. The secondary outcomes were health care costs and length of stay in the two settings. RESULTS: Differences in costs comprise personnel and laboratory costs of applying the algorithm at primary care level (€192) and expenses related to ambulance transports and complete hospital costs for low-risk patients admitted to hospital (€1986). Additional diagnostic procedures were performed in 31.9% (181/567) of the low-risk hospital cohort. The estimated reduction in health care cost when using the 0/1-h algorithm outside of hospital was €1794 per low-risk patient, with a mean decrease in length of stay of 18.9 h. These numbers result in an average per-person QALY gain of 0.0005. Increased QALY and decreased costs indicate that the primary care approach is clearly cost-effective. CONCLUSION: Using the ESC 0/1-h algorithm in low-risk patients in emergency primary care appears to be cost-effective compared to standard hospital management, with an extensive reduction in costs and length of stay per patient.

Impact of prior oral anticoagulant use and outcomes on patients from secondary analysis in the AUGUSTUS trial.

OBJECTIVE: Managing antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and/or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is challenging and can be affected by prior oral anticoagulant (OAC) treatment. We examined the relationship between prior OAC use and outcomes in the AUGUSTUS trial. METHODS: This prespecified secondary analysis is from AUGUSTUS, an open-label, 2-by-2 factorial, RCT to evaluate the safety of apixaban versus vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and aspirin versus placebo in patients with AF and ACS and/or PCI. The primary endpoint, major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding and clinical outcomes were compared in patients receiving (n=2262) or not receiving (n=2352) an OAC prior to enrolment. RESULTS: Patients with prior OAC use had more comorbidities, higher CHA2DS2-VASC and HAS-BLED scores, and were more likely enrolled following elective PCI. There was no difference in major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding with or without prior OAC (30 days: 5.1% vs 5.9% (adjusted HR (aHR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.06); 180 days: 13.5% vs 13.5% (aHR 0.98, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.16)). Patients with prior OAC use had a lower risk of death or ischaemic events (30 days: 1.7% vs 2.8% (aHR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.92); 180 days: 5.4% vs 7.6% (aHR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.88)). No interactions between randomised treatment (apixaban vs VKA, aspirin vs placebo) and prior OAC status were observed for outcomes, apart from apixaban (vs VKA) being associated with a lower risk of myocardial infarction with prior OAC use (180 days: 2.0% vs 3.7% (aHR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.91(). CONCLUSIONS: In AUGUSTUS, prior OAC use was associated with fewer ischaemic events but not more bleeding. In patients with AF and ACS and/or undergoing PCI, clinicians can be assured that the trial results can be applied to patients regardless of their prior OAC status. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02415400.

European Society of Cardiology guidance for the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease during the COVID-19 pandemic: part 1-epidemiology, pathophysiology, and diagnosis.

AIMS: Since its emergence in early 2020, the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has reached pandemic levels, and there have been repeated outbreaks across the globe. The aim of this two-part series is to provide practical knowledge and guidance to aid clinicians in the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in association with COVID-19. METHODS AND RESULTS: A narrative literature review of the available evidence has been performed, and the resulting information has been organized into two parts. The first, reported here, focuses on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and diagnosis of cardiovascular (CV) conditions that may be manifest in patients with COVID-19. The second part, which will follow in a later edition of the journal, addresses the topics of care pathways, treatment, and follow-up of CV conditions in patients with COVID-19. CONCLUSION: This comprehensive review is not a formal guideline but rather a document that provides a summary of current knowledge and guidance to practicing clinicians managing patients with CVD and COVID-19. The recommendations are mainly the result of observations and personal experience from healthcare providers. Therefore, the information provided here may be subject to change with increasing knowledge, evidence from prospective studies, and changes in the pandemic. Likewise, the guidance provided in the document should not interfere with recommendations provided by local and national healthcare authorities.

Diagnosing heart failure with NT-proBNP point-of-care testing: lower costs and better outcomes. A decision analytic study.

BACKGROUND: Afflicting 1-2% of the adult population, heart failure (HF) is a condition with considerable morbidity and mortality. While echocardiography may be considered the gold standard diagnostic test, GPs have relied on symptoms and clinical findings in diagnosing the condition. AIM: The aim of this study was to estimate 1-year health outcome and costs of three diagnostic strategies: 1) history and clinical findings ('clinical diagnosis'); 2) clinical diagnosis supplemented with NTproBNP point-of-care test ('POC test') in the GP's surgery; or (3) in hospital laboratory ('hospital test'). DESIGN & SETTING: A decision tree model was developed to simulate 1-year patient courses with each strategy in Norway. METHOD: Sensitivity and specificity of clinical diagnosis (56% and 68%), and of N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide test ([NT-proBNP] 90% and 65%), were based on published literature. The probabilities of referral to hospital were based on a survey of Norwegian GPs (n = 103). The costs were based on various Norwegian fee schedules. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the uncertainty of the results. RESULTS: The 1-year per person societal costs were €543, €505, and €607 for clinical diagnosis, POC test, and hospital test, respectively. Even though POC entails higher laboratory costs, the total primary care costs were lower because of fewer re-visits with the GP and less use of spirometry. While 38% of patients had a delayed diagnosis with clinical diagnosis, the proportions were 22% with both POC test and hospital test. Results were most sensitive to the probability of use of spirometry. CONCLUSION: POC testing results in earlier diagnosis and lower costs than the other diagnostic modalities.

The significance of ST-elevation in aVL in anterolateral myocardial infarction: An assessment by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.

BACKGROUND: Anterolateral myocardial infarction (MI) is traditionally defined on the electrocardiogram by ST-elevation (STE) in I, aVL, and the precordial leads. Traditional literature holds STE in lead aVL to be associated with occlusion proximal to the first diagonal branch of the left anterior descending coronary artery. However, concomitant ischemia of the inferior myocardium may theoretically lead to attenuation of STE in aVL. We compared segmental distribution of myocardial area at risk (MaR) in patients with and without STE in aVL. METHODS: We identified patients in the MITOCARE study presenting with a first acute MI and new STE in two contiguous anterior leads from V1 to V6 , with or without aVL STE. Patients underwent cardiac magnetic resonance imaging 3-5 days after acute infarction for quantitative assessment of MaR. RESULTS: A total of 32 patients met inclusion criteria; 13 patients with and 19 without STE in lead aVL. MaR > 20% at the basal anterior segment was seen in 54% of patients with aVL STE, and 11% of those without (p = 0.011). MaR > 20% at the apical inferior segment was seen in 62% and 95% of patients with and without aVL STE, respectively (p = 0.029). The total MaR was not different between groups (44% ± 10% and 39% ± 8.3% respectively, p = 0.15). CONCLUSION: Patients with anterior STEMI and concomitant STE in aVL have less MaR in the apical inferior segment and more MaR in the basal anterior segment.

Gender differences in the assessment and treatment of myocardial infarction. / Kjønnsforskjeller i utredning og behandling av hjerteinfarkt.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that there are gender-related differences in the assessment and treatment of myocardial infarction, despite international guidelines that prescribe identical treatment for women and men. We investigated whether these differences occurred in Norway. MATERIAL AND METHOD: All patients admitted to Norwegian hospitals with myocardial infarction from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2014 and registered in the Norwegian Myocardial Infarction Registry were included. Data from the registry were used to analyse differences in the assessment, treatment, complications and survival of women and men in different age groups. RESULTS: A total of 26 447 myocardial infarctions were registered in the Norwegian Myocardial Infarction Registry in the period 2013 ­ 2014. Fewer women than men were assessed by means of coronary angiography. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was used to virtually the same extent for both genders if coronary stenosis was found. Women were recommended secondary prophylactic medication to a lesser extent than men. There were no major differences between men and women in the incidence of complications in the course following myocardial infarction or in survival. INTERPRETATION: Fewer women than men suffering acute myocardial infarction were assessed by means of coronary angiography, and women were recommended secondary prophylactic medication less often than men. The reason for the gender differences is not known, but comorbidity and a potentially greater risk of adverse reactions in women may be contributory factors. The different views of doctors providing treatment may also play a part.

Relationship between time to invasive assessment and clinical outcomes of patients undergoing an early invasive strategy after fibrinolysis for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a patient-level analysis of the randomized early routine invasive clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the relationship between time to invasive assessment and outcomes among ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients randomized to early angiography after fibrinolysis. BACKGROUND: The optimal timing of coronary angiography after fibrinolysis and the association with clinical outcomes is uncertain. METHODS: Patient-level data from 6 randomized trials, with a median time to angiography <12 h after fibrinolysis, were pooled. The primary endpoint was 30-day death or reinfarction. The key secondary endpoint was in-hospital major bleeding. The relationship between fibrinolysis to angiography time and symptom onset to angiography time with outcomes was studied using 2- and 4-h intervals, respectively, and in multivariable models. RESULTS: Among 1,238 patients, the median fibrinolysis to angiography time was 165 min, and the median symptom onset to angiography time was 5.33 h. The primary and key secondary endpoints occurred in 5.7% and 4.7%, respectively. These main endpoints did not vary significantly with increasing fibrinolysis to angiography time. Early angiography (<2 h) after fibrinolysis was not associated with increased bleeding. Recurrent ischemia increased with increasing fibrinolysis to angiography time (3.7% to 7.9%, p for trend = 0.02). Thirty-day and 1-year death/reinfarction and 30-day recurrent ischemia increased significantly with increasing symptom onset to angiography time. Neither fibrinolysis to angiography time nor symptom onset to angiography time was an independent predictor of the primary endpoint. Only symptom onset to angiography time was an independent predictor of 1-year death/reinfarction (hazard ratio: 1.07, 95% confidence interval: 1.02 to 1.12, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Very early angiography (<2 h) after fibrinolysis was not associated with an increased risk of 30-day death/reinfarction or in-hospital major bleeding, and angiography within 4 h after fibrinolysis was associated with reduced 30-day recurrent ischemia. A shorter symptom onset to angiography time (<4 h) was associated with reduced 30-day and 1-year death/reinfarction and 30-day recurrent ischemia. In the current environment of regional networks of 24/7 primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) centers, the clinical implication of these findings is that patients initially treated with fibrinolysis should also be promptly transferred to the nearest PCI center for immediate angiography and PCI. (Early Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PCI] After Fibrinolysis Versus Standard Therapy in ST Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction [STEMI] Patients; NCT01014182).

STEMI treatment in areas remote from primary PCI centres.

In remote, sparsely populated areas with long transfer distances to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) centres it is impossible to deliver PCI within the recommended time limits, and fibrinolysis should be the treatment of choice in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Fibrinolysis should preferably be administered in the pre-hospital setting. Patients with contraindications to fibrinolysis, late presenters and patients with cardiogenic shock should be transferred for primary PCI, even when the transfer delays are substantial. Fibrinolytic therapy is not the final step of reperfusion treatment, but should be followed by transfer to a PCI centre as soon as possible for rescue PCI or routine angiography with PCI if indicated. The optimal timing of routine angiography following fibrinolysis is not settled, but recent trials suggest a time window of two to 12 hours. A well-organised system of care with clear treatment protocols and coordinated transfer systems is necessary for identifying treatment-eligible patients for on-site fibrinolysis or transfer for primary PCI, and for ensuring that therapies are available in a timely manner 24 hours a day, seven days a week. A well-organised STEMI network is also necessary for early transfer of lytic treated patients for rescue PCI or routine angiography.

Choice of generic antihypertensive drugs for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease--a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is one of the leading causes of cardiovascular disease (CVD). A range of antihypertensive drugs exists, and their prices vary widely mainly due to patent rights. The objective of this study was to explore the cost-effectiveness of different generic antihypertensive drugs as first, second and third choice for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. METHODS: We used the Norwegian Cardiovascular Disease model (NorCaD) to simulate the cardiovascular life of patients from hypertension without symptoms until they were all dead or 100 years old. The risk of CVD events and costs were based on recent Norwegian sources. RESULTS: In single-drug treatment, all antihypertensives are cost-effective compared to no drug treatment. In the base-case analysis, the first, second and third choice of antihypertensive were calcium channel blocker, thiazide and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor. However the sensitivity and scenario analyses indicated considerable uncertainty in that angiotensin receptor blockers as well as, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, beta blockers and thiazides could be the most cost-effective antihypertensive drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Generic antihypertensives are cost-effective in a wide range of risk groups. There is considerable uncertainty, however, regarding which drug is the most cost-effective.

Assessment of left ventricular function in ST-elevation myocardial infarction by global longitudinal strain: a comparison with ejection fraction, infarct size, and wall motion score index measured by non-invasive imaging modalities.

AIMS: We aimed to compare two-dimensional global longitudinal strain (GS) with different non-invasive imaging modalities for the assessment of left ventricular function in an ST-elevation myocardial infarction population. METHODS AND RESULTS: GS was compared with ejection fraction (EF) determined by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), standard echocardiography (echo), contrast echo, and electrocardiography-gated single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), as well as with MRI-determined relative infarct size and echo-determined wall motion score index (WMSI), in 163 patients participating in the NORwegian Study on District Treatment of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (NORDISTEMI). The linear relation between GS and standard echo (r(2)= 0.43, P <0.001), contrast echo (r(2)= 0.38, P <0.001), and SPECT-determined EF (r(2)= 0.52, P <0.001) was almost identical as that between GS and the gold standard MRI-determined EF (r(2)= 0.47, P <0.001). GS was best associated with WMSI by echo (r(2)= 0.55, P <0.001), while the associations between GS and relative infarct size were weaker (r = 0.43, P <0.001). Receiver operator characteristics curves, used to analyse the ability of GS to discriminate low EF (≤ 40%) measured by the four different modalities, large myocardial infarction (MI ≥ 15.7%), and high WMSI (≥ 1.5), were significant for all. GS was shown to be the best predictor of low EF measured by MRI [area under the curve (AUC) 0.965], while the lowest AUC was found between GS and large MI (0.814). CONCLUSION: Global strain is associated well with EF measured by all modalities. Global strain was found to be the best predictor of low EF measured by the gold standard MRI. Since global strain is an inexpensive test, these data may be of health economic interest.

Health and cost consequences of early versus late invasive strategy after thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction.

UNLABELLED: The NORwegian study on DIstrict treatment of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction showed an improved clinical outcome with early transfer for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared to a more conservative approach after thrombolysis. The aim of this substudy was to compare the 12-month quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs of these alternative strategies. METHODS: Patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction <6 h duration and >90 min expected delay to PCI, received full-dose tenecteplase and were randomized to either early or late invasive strategy (n = 266). Detailed quality of life and resource use data were registered prospectively for a period of 12 months. Health outcomes were measured as quality of life using a generic instrument (15D). Quality of life scores were translated into QALYs. Unit costs were based on hospital accounts, fee schedules, and market prices. RESULTS: After 12 months of follow-up, patients in the early invasive group had 0.008 (95% CI -0.027 to 0.043) more QALYs compared to the late invasive group. The mean total costs were €18,201 in the early versus €17,643 in the late invasive group, with a mean difference of €558 (95% CI -2258 to 3484). Cost/QALY was €69,750 while cost/avoided clinical endpoint was €5636. CONCLUSION: Early and late invasive strategies after thrombolysis resulted in similar quality of life and similar costs in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients living far from a PCI centre (NCT00161005).

Assessment of left ventricular function with magnetic resonance imaging vs. echocardiography, contrast echocardiography, and single-photon emission computed tomography in patients with recent ST-elevation myocardial infarction.

AIMS: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is often considered to be the gold standard in measuring left ventricular function and volumes. The aim of this study was to assess the agreements between standard echocardiography (standard echo), contrast echocardiography (contrast echo), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and MRI in the determination of left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) and end-diastolic volumes (EDV) in patients treated for acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). METHODS AND RESULTS: Standard echo, contrast echo, SPECT and MRI were performed on the same day, 3 months after STEMI in 150 patients participating in the NORwegian Study on District Treatment of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (NORDISTEMI). Bland-Altman analysis of EF measured by all four imaging modalities showed generally low mean differences but wide limits of agreement. The mean EDV difference, however, was consistently higher when MRI was compared with standard echo (54.9 mL), contrast echo (41.7 mL) and SPECT (54.6 mL), and the limits of agreement were wider. The mean EDV differences between contrast echo vs. standard echo, SPECT vs. standard echo and contrast echo vs. SPECT were small. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that all four imaging modalities measured EF closely similar after STEMI as demonstrated by a very small bias. The limits of agreement were however wide. EDV measured by MRI was consistently higher when compared with the other methods which may be caused by different tracing-methods and imaging principles. As echocardiography is preferable from a cost-benefit point of view, further analysis would be needed to clarify the nature of such differences.

Cost-effectiveness of primary percutaneous coronary intervention versus thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the long-term cost-effectiveness of two reperfusion modalities in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus thrombolytic therapy. DESIGN: A state-transition model that follows patients from when they develop STEMI until they die was developed. The model encompassed events and health states. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken. RESULTS: For a 65-year old man, life expectancy was 8.3 years with primary PCI and 7.6 years with thrombolytic therapy. The lifetime costs were 19,250 euros (NOK 154,000) and 29,250 euros (NOK 234,000), respectively, for patients living close to an invasive unit. Cost savings from PCI were mainly due to the reduction in future coronary interventions. For patients needing helicopter transport to arrive in time to an invasive unit for PCI, the costs were 24,000 euros (NOK 192,000) and 29,250 euros (NOK 234,000), respectively (all costs undiscounted). For women, the estimates were somewhat higher due to lower mortality. CONCLUSION: Compared with thrombolytic therapy, reperfusion by primary PCI results in greater health benefits at reduced lifetime costs. These findings may have important clinical implications in an increasing cost-conscious health care environment.