Clinical governance of patients with acute coronary syndromes.

AIMS: Using the principles of clinical governance, a patient-centred approach intended to promote holistic quality improvement, we designed a prospective, multicentre study in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We aimed to verify and quantify consecutive inclusion and describe relative and absolute effects of indicators of quality for diagnosis and therapy. METHODS AND RESULTS: Administrative codes for invasive coronary angiography and acute myocardial infarction were used to estimate the ACS universe. The ratio between the number of patients included and the estimated ACS universe was the consecutive index. Co-primary quality indicators were timely reperfusion in patients admitted with ST-elevation ACS and optimal medical therapy at discharge. Cox-proportional hazard models for 1-year death with admission and discharge-specific covariates quantified relative risk reductions and adjusted number needed to treat (NNT) absolute risk reductions. Hospital codes tested had a 99.5% sensitivity to identify ACS universe. We estimated that 7344 (95% CI: 6852-7867) ACS patients were admitted and 5107 were enrolled-i.e. a consecutive index of 69.6% (95% CI 64.9-74.5%), which varied from 30.7 to 79.2% across sites. Timely reperfusion was achieved in 22.4% (95% CI: 20.7-24.1%) of patients, was associated with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for 1-year death of 0.60 (95% CI: 0.40-0.89) and an adjusted NNT of 65 (95% CI: 44-250). Corresponding values for optimal medical therapy were 70.1% (95% CI: 68.7-71.4%), HR of 0.50 (95% CI: 0.38-0.66), and NNT of 98 (95% CI: 79-145). CONCLUSION: A comprehensive approach to quality for patients with ACS may promote equitable access of care and inform implementation of health care delivery. REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.Gov ID NCT04255537.

Clinical governance programme in patients with acute coronary syndrome: design and methodology of a quality improvement initiative.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the availability of diverse evidence-based diagnostic and treatment options, many patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) still fail to receive effective, safe and timely diagnoses and therapies. The Association of Acute CardioVascular Care of the European Society of Cardiology has proposed and retrospectively validated a set of ACS-specific quality indicators. Combining these indicators with the principles of clinical governance-a holistic, patient-centred approach intended to promote continuous quality improvement-we designed the clinical governance programme in patients with ACS. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre quality improvement initiative exploring multiple dimensions of care, including diagnosis, therapy, patient satisfaction, centre organisation and efficiency in all comers patients with ACS.The study will enrol ≈ 5000 patients prospectively (ie, at the time of the first objective qualifying ACS criterion) with a 1-year follow-up. Consecutive inclusion will be promoted by a simplified informed consent process and quantified by the concordance with corresponding hospital administrative records using diagnosis-related group codes of ACS.Coprimary outcome measures are (1) timely reperfusion in patients with ST-elevation ACS and (2) optimal medical therapy at discharge in patients with confirmed acute myocardial infarction. Secondary outcomes broadly include multiple indicators of the process of care. Clinical endpoints (ie, death, myocardial infarction, stroke and bleeding) will be adjudicated by a clinical event committee according to predefined criteria. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by local ethics committee of all study sites. As a quality improvement initiative and to promote consecutive inclusion of the population of interest, a written informed consent will be requested only to patients who are discharged alive. Dissemination will be actively promoted by (1) the registration site (ClinicalTrials.Gov ID NCT04255537), (2) collaborations with investigators through open data access and sharing.

Which is the best catheter to perform atrial fibrillation ablation? A comparison between standard ThermoCool, SmartTouch, and Surround Flow catheters.

INTRODUCTION: Catheter ablation (CA) is an established therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF). The SmartTouch catheter (STc) provides information about catheter tip to tissue contact force (CF). The Surround Flow catheter (SFc) provides a uniform cooling of the tip during ablation. We sought to analyze the impact of STc and SFc on CA of paroxysmal AF in terms of feasibility and acute efficacy. METHODS AND RESULTS: Sixty-three patients (mean age 57.6 ± 9.8 years, 53 males) with paroxysmal AF underwent pulmonary veins (PVs) antral isolation, by using standard ThermoCool catheter (TCc) in 21, STc in 21, and SFc in 21. Total procedural, fluoroscopy, and radiofrequency (RF) delivery times; percentage of persistently deconnected PVs after 30 min; and percentage of isolated PVs at the end of the procedure were measured. The use of both STc and SFc obtained a reduction of fluoroscopy time (TCc 34 ± 18 min, STc 20 ± 10 min, p < 0.001; SFc 21 ± 13 min, p = 0.02 vs TCc) and RF time (TCc 41 ± 13 min, STc 30 ± 14 min, p = 0.013; SFc 30 ± 9 min, p < 0.01 vs TCc). The use of STc resulted in a reduction of procedural time (TCc 181 ± 53 min, STc 140 ± 53 min, p < 0.001; SFc 170 ± 51 min, p = NS vs TCc). The percentage of isolated PVs was comparable between groups (TCc 96 % vs STc 98 % vs SFc 96 %; p = NS). The percentage of deconnected PVs at 30 min was lower in TCc (89 %) than in STc (95 %) and in SFc (95 %) group (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Both STc and SFc allowed a simplification of CA of paroxysmal AF. In addition, they reduced early PVs reconnection. Sixty-three patients with paroxysmal AF underwent ablation by standard ThermoCool, SmartTouch, or Surround Flow catheter. Both the SmartTouch and the Surround Flow significantly reduced radiofrequency and fluoroscopy times, as well as pulmonary veins reconnection rate at 30 min. Moreover, the SmartTouch reduced overall duration of the procedure.

Cardiomyopathy induced by adenosine-insensitive atrial tachycardia.

Tachycardia-induced cardiomyopathy may be provoked by several arrhythmias; it may reverse following stable restoration of sinus rhythm. We report the case of a 33-year-old man who was diagnosed to have a dilated cardiomyopathy. Over a few months, the cardiomyopathy reversed. Subsequently, atrial tachycardia, associated with a recurrent impairment of left ventricular function, occurred. Adenosine infusion during atrial tachycardia caused transient atrioventricular block without the interruption of arrhythmia, which is consistent with a micro-reentrant mechanism. Electroanatomic mapping during tachycardia showed a focus arising from the left superior pulmonary vein ostium. After successful catheter ablation of the focus, left ventricular function fully recovered.

[Coronary care units: who to admit and how long]. / Le unità di terapia intensiva cardiologica: chi ricoverare, per quanto tempo.

Coronary care units (CCUs) should ensure the best intensive therapy for all critical cardiologic patients and not only for patients with acute coronary heart disease. Such structures apply the Hub & Spoke model, which consists of an integrated network of services allowing a health organization in which different realities interact and collaborate; this organization is composed of referral core centers (Hubs) and smaller structures (Spokes) referring to Hubs that are engaged in selection, channeling of patients in the acute phase, and for follow-up care of patients in the post-acute phase. The CCUs, based on the organizational reality in which they operate, must hospitalize and dismiss complex patients in a brief lapse of time. Criteria for CCU admission and length of stay are still ill-defined. Therefore, the following paper, summarizing the contents of the recent CCU convention at the ANMCO congress, attempts to define the priorities for hospitalization in the CCU, based on three different levels of evidence: level A indication (immediate mandatory admission); level B indication (immediate admission, the availability of beds allowing); level C indication (admission not indicated, but possible in the absence of other alternatives, e.g. limited bed availability in other intensive care units). Concerning the duration of stay within the CCU, clear-cut indications are difficult, but the concept is emphasized that the length of stay should be minimized, given the limited bed availability, in order to ensure the availability of intensive monitoring to all critical patients.