Disparities in Revascularization After ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) Before and After the 2002 IOM Report.

OBJECTIVES: To examine nationwide trends for racial disparities in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention after ST elevated Myocardial Infarction (STEMI). BACKGROUND: The Institute of Medicine (IOM) report published in 2002 showed that African Americans were less likely to receive coronary revascularization such as CABG and stents even after controlling for socioeconomics. It recommended increased awareness of these disparities among health professionals to reduce this. We hypothesized that increased awareness of disparities since this report would have translated to reduction in racial disparities in percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted using data from the Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality's (AHRQ) National Inpatient Sample (NIS) 1998-2007. All patients with STEMI during this period were identified. The proportion that received Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) during the incident admission was compared by different ethnicities over the time period. Multivariable regression for each year was conducted using Poisson regression with robust variances. The analysis controlled for gender, insurance status, co-morbidities, hospital bed size, location and teaching status. RESULTS: Based on the database, about 2.04 million patients were managed for acute Myocardial Infarction from 1998 to 2007, of these 938,176 had STEMI. The primary PCI rate after STEMI among Caucasians was 29.1%, African Americans-23.3% and Hispanics-28.3% [P < 0.001] On multivariate regression, compared to Caucasians, African Americans and Hispanics respectively were 26% (IRR = 0.74) and 16% (IRR = 0.84) less likely to receive PCI (both with P < 0.001) during the entire study period. CONCLUSION: Ethnic disparities in primary PCI after STEMI persist despite the 2002 IOM report.

American Society of Echocardiography Algorithm for Degenerative Mitral Regurgitation: Comparison With CMR.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) algorithm for assessing mitral regurgitation (MR) to cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and left ventricular (LV) remodeling following mitral intervention. BACKGROUND: The ASE recommends integrating multiple echocardiographic parameters for assessing MR. The ASE guidelines include an algorithm that weighs the parameters and highlights those considered indicative of definitely mild or definitely severe MR. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled 152 (age 62 ± 13 years; 59% male) patients with degenerative MR who underwent ASE algorithm-guided echocardiographic and CMR grading of MR severity. Using the ASE algorithm, patients were graded as definitely mild, grade I, grade II, grade III, grade IV, or definitely severe MR. CMR MR volume was graded as mild (<30 mL), grade II moderate (30-44 mL), grade III moderate (45-59 mL), or severe (≥60 mL). A subgroup of 63 patients underwent successful mitral intervention, of whom 48 had postintervention CMR. RESULTS: Only 52% of patients with definitely severe MR by the ASE algorithm had severe MR by CMR, and 10% had mild MR by CMR. There was an increase in post mitral intervention LV reverse remodeling with worsening MR severity using CMR (P < 0.0001) but not the ASE algorithm (P = 0.07). Severe MR by CMR was an independent predictor of post mitral intervention LV reverse remodeling and definitely severe MR by the ASE algorithm was not. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with degenerative MR, agreement between CMR and the ASE algorithm was suboptimal. Severe MR by CMR was an independent predictor of post mitral intervention LV reverse remodeling, whereas definitely severe MR by the ASE algorithm was not. These findings suggest an important role for CMR in surgical decision making in degenerative MR. (Comparison Study of Echocardiography and Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Assessment of Mitral and Aortic Regurgitation; NCT04038879).