Health inequalities in cardiopulmonary resuscitation and use of automated electrical defibrillators in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) outcomes can be improved by strengthening the chain of survival, namely prompt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and automated external defibrillator (AED). However, provision of bystander CPR and AED use remains low due to individual patient factors ranging from lack of education to socioeconomic barriers and due to lack of resources such as limited availability of AEDs in the community. Although the impact of health inequalities on survival from OHCA is documented, it is imperative that we identify and implement strategies to improve public health and outcomes from OHCA overall but with a simultaneous emphasis on making care more equitable. Disparities in CPR delivery and AED use in OHCA exist based on factors including sex, education level, socioeconomic status, race and ethnicity, all of which we discuss in this review. Most importantly, we discuss the barriers to AED use, and strategies on how these may be overcome.

Health Care Resource, Economic, and Readmission Implications After Acute Decompensated Aortic Stenosis-A Nationwide Study.

Acute decompensated aortic stenosis (ADAS) is common. The cumulative burden of ADAS from a clinical, health care resource, and financial perspective is unknown. This study sought to assess the national impact of ADAS compared with electively treated, stable patients with aortic stenosis (non-ADAS). Using the National Readmissions Database between 2016 and 2019, patients with ADAS and non-ADAS were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes. Patients with ADAS were propensity-matched to non-ADAS patients (1:2) using age, gender, and Charlson co-morbidity index. We compared in-hospital mortality, length of stay (LOS), health care-associated costs, and 90-day readmission data between the 2 cohorts. A total of 51,498 propensity-matched patients were included in this study: median age 75 years, 64% men. The in-hospital mortality for ADAS was higher than non-ADAS (2.8% vs 1.5%, p <0.0001). The LOS during the index admission was longer for ADAS (9 [5 to 13] vs 4 [2 to 6] days, p <0.0001). The health care-associated costs per patient was greater for ADAS ($55,450.0 [41,860.4 to 74,500.7] vs $43,405.7 [34,218.5 to 56,034.8], p <0.0001). Readmission to hospital within 90 days was more frequent in ADAS (21.1 vs 16.8%, p <0.001). The in-hospital mortality during readmission was higher with ADAS (3.9% vs 2.8%, p = 0.004). The readmission LOS was longer with ADAS (4 [2 to 7] vs 3 [2 to 6] days, p <0.0001). In conclusion, ADAS imposes a significant burden clinically and financially and on health care resources compared with non-ADAS during the index admission and 90-day follow-up. There is an urgent need to predict ADAS and optimize the timing of aortic valve replacement to reduce the incidence and the burden associated with ADAS.

Sex Differences in Heart Failure: What Do We Know?

Heart failure (HF) remains an important global health issue, substantially contributing to morbidity and mortality. According to epidemiological studies, men and women face nearly equivalent lifetime risks for HF. However, their experiences diverge significantly when it comes to HF subtypes: men tend to develop HF with reduced ejection fraction more frequently, whereas women are predominantly affected by HF with preserved ejection fraction. This divergence underlines the presence of numerous sex-based disparities across various facets of HF, encompassing aspects such as risk factors, clinical presentation, underlying pathophysiology, and response to therapy. Despite these apparent discrepancies, our understanding of them is far from complete, with key knowledge gaps still existing. Current guidelines from various professional societies acknowledge the existence of sex-based differences in HF management, yet they are lacking in providing explicit, actionable recommendations tailored to these differences. In this comprehensive review, we delve deeper into these sex-specific differences within the context of HF, critically examining associated definitions, risk factors, and therapeutic strategies. We provide a specific emphasis on aspects exclusive to women, such as the impact of pregnancy-induced hypertension and premature menopause, as these unique factors warrant greater attention in the broader HF discussion. Additionally, we aim to clarify ongoing controversies and knowledge gaps pertaining to the pharmacological treatment of HF and the sex-specific indications for cardiac implantable electronic devices. By shining a light on these issues, we hope to stimulate a more nuanced understanding and promote the development of more sex-responsive approaches in HF management.

Impact of Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices on Cost and Length of Stay in Patients With Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement and Transcutaneous Aortic Valve Implantation.

Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in aortic stenosis are associated with arrhythmic complications that can require cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation, but impact on healthcare-associated cost (HAC) and length of stay (LOS) are unknown. This study aimed to assess differences among SAVR/TAVI patients with CIED implantation on HAC and LOS. Patients hospitalized for SAVR or TAVI between 2011 and 2017 on the National Inpatient Sample database were identified and stratified according to presence/type of CIED implantation. During this period, 95,262 patients were identified; 6,435 (6.8%) patients received CIED (median [interquartile range] age: 74.0 [66.0 to 82.0] years). The median adjusted HAC was $44,271 and LOS was 6 days. CIED implantation was associated with longer LOS and higher adjusted HAC in patients with SAVR and TAVI (p <0.0001). Patients with in-hospital death and complications because of SAVR or TAVI had longer preceding in-hospital days of admission. Male patients admitted to small hospitals and the West region had the highest HAC. In conclusion, CIED implantation for arrhythmias results in higher HAC and longer LOS in patients with aortic stenosis for both SAVR and TAVI.

Impact of Atrial Fibrillation on Outcomes of Aortic Valve Implantation.

New or preexisting atrial fibrillation (AF) is frequent in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement. We evaluated whether the presence of AF during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) impacts the length of stay, healthcare adjusted costs, and inpatient mortality. The median length of stay in the patients with AF increased by 33.3% as compared with those without AF undergoing TAVI and SAVR (5 [3 to 8] days vs 3 [2 to 6] days, p <0.0001 and 8 [6 to 12] days vs 6 [5 to 10] days, p <0.0001, respectively). AF increased the median value of adjusted healthcare associated costs of both TAVI ($46,754 [36,613 to 59,442] vs $49,960 [38,932 to 64,201], p <0.0001) and SAVR ($40,948 [31,762 to 55,854] vs $45,683 [35,154 to 63,026], p <0.0001). The presence of AF did not independently increase the in-hospital mortality. In conclusion, in patients undergoing SAVR or TAVI, AF significantly increased the length of stay and adjusted healthcare adjusted costs but did not independently increase the in-hospital mortality.

Special Article - The role of hand-held ultrasound for cardiopulmonary assessment during a pandemic.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, we are likely to see a significant increase in the requests for rapid assessment of cardiac function, due to the frequent pre-existence of cardiac pathologies in patients admitted to hospital, and to the emergence of specific cardiac manifestations of this infection, such as myocarditis, sepsis related cardiomyopathy, stress induced cardiomyopathy and acute coronary syndromes. Hand-held, point-of-care ultrasound (HH-POCUS) is particularly suited for the provision of rapid, focused, integrated assessments of the heart and lungs. We present a review of the indications and protocols for focused HH-POCUS use in an acute setting and formulate proposals for streamlining their application in the COVID-19 context towards guiding optimum management of these patients while at the same time allowing adherence to robust infection control measures to provide safety to both the patient and our clinical staff.

Cardiovascular Risk Assessment: A Systematic Review of Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Many guidelines exist for screening and risk assessment for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in apparently healthy persons. PURPOSE: To systematically review current primary prevention guidelines on adult cardiovascular risk assessment and highlight the similarities and differences to aid clinician decision making. DATA SOURCES: Publications in MEDLINE and CINAHL between 3 May 2009 and 30 June 2016 were identified. On 30 June 2016, the Guidelines International Network International Guideline Library, National Guideline Clearinghouse, National Library for Health Guidelines Finder, Canadian Medical Association Clinical Practice Guidelines Infobase, and Web sites of organizations responsible for guideline development were searched. STUDY SELECTION: 2 reviewers screened titles and abstracts to identify guidelines from Western countries containing recommendations for cardiovascular risk assessment for healthy adults. DATA EXTRACTION: 2 reviewers independently assessed rigor of guideline development using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument, and 1 extracted the recommendations. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of the 21 guidelines, 17 showed considerable rigor of development. These recommendations address assessment of total cardiovascular risk (5 guidelines), dysglycemia (7 guidelines), dyslipidemia (2 guidelines), and hypertension (3 guidelines). All but 1 recommendation advocates for screening, and most include prediction models integrating several relatively simple risk factors for either deciding on further screening or guiding subsequent management. No consensus on the strategy for screening, recommended target population, screening tests, or treatment thresholds exists. LIMITATION: Only guidelines developed by Western national or international medical organizations were included. CONCLUSION: Considerable discrepancies in cardiovascular screening guidelines still exist, with no consensus on optimum screening strategies or treatment threshold. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Barts Charity.

Comparative cost-effectiveness of non-invasive imaging tests in patients presenting with chronic stable chest pain with suspected coronary artery disease: a systematic review.

Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality globally. The most cost-effective imaging strategy to diagnose CAD in patients with stable chest pain is however uncertain. To review the evidence on comparative cost-effectiveness of different imaging strategies for patients presenting with stable chest pain symptoms suggestive for CAD. Systematic review. Studies performing a formal economic evaluation or decision analysis in the English language published between January 1995 and December 2015 were identified using PubMed, Medline (OvidSP), Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane economic evaluations library, and EconLit. Reviews and meta-analyses were excluded. Two independent reviewers assessed titles and abstracts. Of the 4498 titles identified, 70 met our selection criteria. One reviewer used a modified version of the CHEERS checklist to assess study quality. One reviewer extracted data on study details, which were checked by a second reviewer. There is a major heterogeneity between the available cost-effectiveness studies included in this study. The included studies compared very different testing strategies in very different ways and provided mostly short-term results. Strategies of no-testing and xECG were underrepresented. Nonetheless, the findings from this systematic review suggest that for patients with a low to intermediate prior probability of having obstructive CAD, computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) may be cost-effective as an initial diagnostic imaging test in comparison with CAG or other non-invasive diagnostic tests. If functional testing is required, stress echocardiography (SE) or single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) are suggested to be cost-effective initial strategies in patients with intermediate prior probability of CAD. Yet, other functional testing strategies such as xECG and positron-emission tomography (PET) scanning have not been studied as intensely. Immediate CAG is suggested to be a cost-effective strategy for patients at a high prior probability of having obstructive CAD whom may benefit from revascularization. The study emphasizes the inextricable link between clinical effectiveness and economic efficiency. Evidence suggests that the optimal diagnostic imaging strategy for individuals suspected of having CAD is CTCA for low and intermediate disease probability, followed by SE or SPECT as necessary, and invasive CAG for high disease probability. Further studies are needed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of alternative non-invasive tests, including a no-testing strategy.