Sex Differences in Management and Outcomes of Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients Presenting With Cardiogenic Shock.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine the sex differences in the risk profile, management, and outcomes among patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS). BACKGROUND: Contemporary clinical data regarding sex differences in the management and outcomes of AMI patients presenting with CS are scarce. METHODS: Patients admitted with AMI-CS from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Chest Pain-MI registry between October 2008 to December 2017 were included. Sex differences in baseline characteristics, in-hospital management, and outcomes were compared. Patients ≥65 years of age with available linkage data to Medicare claims were included in the analysis of 1-year outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for patient and hospital-related covariates were used to estimate sex-specific differences in in-hospital and 1-year outcomes, respectively. RESULTS: Among 17,195 patients presenting with AMI-CS, 37.3% were women. Women were older, had a higher prevalence of comorbidities, and had worse renal function at presentation. Women were less likely to receive guideline-directed medical therapies within 24 hours and at discharge, undergo diagnostic angiography (85.0% vs 91.1%), or receive mechanical circulatory support (25.4% vs 33.8%). Women had higher risks of in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.02-1.19) and major bleeding (adjusted OR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.12-1.34). For patients ≥65 years of age, women did not have a higher risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted HR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.88-1.09) and mortality or heart failure hospitalization (adjusted HR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.91-1.12) at 1 year compared with men. CONCLUSIONS: In this large nationwide analysis of patients with AMI-CS, women were less likely to receive guideline recommended care, including revascularization, and had worse in-hospital outcomes than men. At 1 year, there were no sex differences in the risk of mortality. Efforts are needed to address sex disparities in the initial care of AMI-CS patients.

Gender disparities in difficulty accessing healthcare and cost-related medication non-adherence: The CDC behavioral risk factor surveillance system (BRFSS) survey.

Ensuring healthcare access is critical to maintain health and prevent illness. Studies demonstrate gender disparities in healthcare access. Less is known about how these vary with age, race/ethnicity, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. We utilized cross-sectional data from 2016 to 2019 CDC Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), a U.S. telephone-based survey of adults (≥18 years). Measures of difficulty accessing healthcare included absence of healthcare coverage, delay in healthcare access, absence of primary care physician, >1-year since last checkup, inability to see doctor due to cost, and cost-related medication non-adherence. We studied the association between gender and these variables using multivariable-adjusted logistic regression models, stratifying by age, race/ethnicity, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease status. Our population consisted of 1,737,397 individuals; 54% were older (≥45 years), 51% women, 63% non-Hispanic White, 12% non-Hispanic Black,17% Hispanic, 9% reported atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. In multivariable-adjusted models, women were more likely to report delay in healthcare access: odds ratio (OR) and (95% confidence interval): 1.26 (1.11, 1.43) [p < 0.001], inability to see doctor due to cost: 1.29 (1.22, 1.36) [p < 0.001], cost-related medication non-adherence: 1.24 (1.01, 1.50) [p = 0.04]. Women were less likely to report lack of healthcare coverage: 0.71 (0.66, 0.75) [p < 0.001] and not having a primary care physician: 0.50 (0.48, 0.52) [p < 0.001]. Disparities were pronounced in younger (<45 years) and Black women. Identifying these barriers, particularly among younger women and Black women, is crucial to ensure equitable healthcare access to all individuals.

Prevalence and predictors of cost-related medication nonadherence in individuals with cardiovascular disease: Results from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey.

Medication nonadherence is highly prevalent among patients with chronic cardiovascular disease. Poor adherence has been associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Medication cost is a major driver for medication nonadherence. Utilizing data from the 2016 to 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey, we estimated the prevalence of cost-related medication nonadherence (CRMNA) among the overall population and among individuals who reported a history of diabetes, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), or hypertension. We then performed multivariable logistic regression to analyze sociodemographic factors associated with CRMNA. Our study population consisted of 142,577 individuals of whom 24% were older than 65 years, 47% were men, 66% were White, 17% Black, 35% had hypertension, 13% had diabetes mellitus, and 10% had ASCVD. CRMNA was reported in 10% of the overall population, 12% among those with hypertension, 17% among those with diabetes, and 17% among those with ASCVD. Age below 65 years, female gender, unemployment, lower income, lower educational attainment, having at least 1 comorbidity, and living in a state that did not expand Medicaid were independently associated with CRMNA. The prevalence of CRMNA increased with greater number of these high-risk sociodemographic factors. We conclude that the prevalence of CRMNA is 10% among U.S. adults overall and is higher among those with common chronic diseases. Risk factors associated with CRMNA should be addressed in order to improve adherence rates and health outcomes among high-risk individuals.

Hospital Readmission in Patients With Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection.

Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) can present with various clinical symptoms, including chest pain, syncope, and sudden cardiac death, particularly in those without atherosclerotic risk factors. In this contemporary analysis, we aimed to identify the causes and predictors of 30-day hospital readmission in SCAD patients. We utilized the latest Nationwide Readmissions Database from 2016 - 2017 to identify patients with a primary discharge diagnosis of SCAD. The primary outcome was 30-day readmission. Among 795 patients admitted with a principal discharge diagnosis of SCAD, 85 (11.3%) were readmitted within 30 days of discharge from index admission (69.8% women, mean age of 54.3 ± 0.8). More than half of the readmissions (57%) were cardiac-related readmissions. Common cardiac causes for 30-day hospital readmission were acute coronary syndrome (27.3%), chest pain/unspecified angina (24.6%), heart failure (17.5%), and recurrent SCAD (8.3%). In conclusion, we found that following hospitalization for SCAD, almost one-tenth of patients were readmitted within 30 days, largely due to cardiac cause . Risk stratifying patients with SCAD, identifying high-risk features or atypical phenotypes of SCAD, and using appropriate management strategies may prevent hospital readmissions and reduce healthcare-related costs. Further studies are warranted to confirm these causes of readmission in SCAD patients.

Racial disparities among Asian Americans with atrial fibrillation: An analysis from the NCDR® PINNACLE Registry.

BACKGROUND: There is paucity of data on Atrial Fibrillation (AF) management and associated clinical outcomes among Asian Americans. This study sought to investigate baseline risk factor profiles, racial disparities in clinical management and adverse clinical outcomes among White and Asian Americans. METHODS: We used National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR®) Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence (PINNACLE) registry and linked Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services data to identify Asian and White patients with AF between January 1, 2013-June 30, 2018. We compared rates of baseline risk factors, management strategies (rate versus rhythm control), anticoagulation use and rates of adverse events between racial groups. The two race groups were compared using hierarchical multivariable adjusted regression models to account for site and confounders. RESULTS: In total, 1,359,827 patients (18,793 Asians and 1,341,034 Whites) were included in our analysis. Compared to White Americans, Asian Americans were more likely to use a rate control strategy (Odds Ratio [OR]: 1.20, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.15-1.25) and lower odds of rhythm control strategy (atrial ablations, cardioversions, or use of antiarrhythmic drugs) (OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.80-0.87) in adjusted analysis. Use of oral anticoagulants and direct oral anticoagulants were similar. There were no significant race-based differences in likelihood of all-cause mortality, stroke, and bleeding requiring hospitalization. Analyses performed using propensity score matching were consistent with the main results. CONCLUSIONS: Asian Americans with AF have a lower likelihood of being managed with rhythm control strategies. Overall use of OAC and AF related adverse events remain similar between the two racial groups.

Eligibility for Low-Dose Rivaroxaban Based on the COMPASS Trial: Insights from the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System.

INTRODUCTION: Low-dose rivaroxaban reduced major adverse cardiac and limb events among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease (ASCVD) in the COMPASS trial. The objective of our study was to evaluate the eligibility and budgetary impact of the COMPASS trial in a real-world population. METHODS: The VA administrative and clinical databases were utilized to conduct a cross-sectional study to identify patients eligible for low-dose rivaroxaban receiving care at all 141 facilities between October 1, 2014 and September 30, 2015. Proportion of patients with stable ASCVD eligible for low-dose rivaroxaban and prevalence of multiple risk enrichment criteria among eligible patients. Pharmaceutical budgetary impact using VA pharmacy pricing. Chi-squared and Student's t tests were used to compare patients eligible versus ineligible patients. RESULTS: From an initial cohort of 1,248,214 patients with ASCVD, 488,495 patients (39.1%) met trial eligibility criteria. Eligible patients were older (74.2 vs 64.5 years) with higher proportion of hypertension (84.1% vs 82.1%) and diabetes (46.2% vs 32.9) compared with ineligible patients (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). A median of 38.7% (IQR 4.6%) of total ASCVD patients per facility were rivaroxaban eligible. Estimated annual VA pharmacy budgetary impact would range from $0.47 billion to $1.88 billion for 25% to 100% treatment penetration. Annual facility level pharmaceutical budgetary impact would be a median of $12.3 million (IQR $8.0-$16.3 million) for treatment of all eligible patients. Among eligible patients, age greater than 65 years was the most common risk enrichment factor (86.9%). Prevalence of eligible patients with multiple enrichment factors varied from 34.2% (one factor) to 6.2% (four or more). CONCLUSION: Over one third of patients with stable ASCVD may qualify for low-dose rivaroxaban within the VA. Additional studies are needed to understand eligibility in other populations and a formal cost-effectiveness analysis is warranted.

Improving adherence to cardiovascular guidelines: realistic transition from paper to patient.

Introduction: The emphasis on clinical trials to inform evidence-based medicine remains paramount within the cardiovascular community. Although such high-quality evidence is often translated into national and international guidelines, there exists a large gap between guideline development and guideline implementation into daily clinical practice.Areas covered: This article outlines barriers that impede guideline adherence and possible strategies to overcome such barriers. Barriers intrinsic and extrinsic to clinicians are discussed. The structured process of guideline implementation including guideline adoption, diffusion, and dissemination is discussed. Lastly, the authors review in detail the current and potential future elements of guideline diffusion and dissemination.Expert opinion: Improving guideline adherence remains challenging as it requires understanding of and navigation through various barriers. However, further research specific to cardiovascular medicine guidelines is necessary to better understand the objective effectiveness of various strategies employed by guideline writers and medical societies to improve adherence. The cost-effectiveness of nationwide dissemination strategies in improving guideline adherence and patient outcomes is also necessary but is largely unknown.