Registry-Based Prospective, Active Surveillance of Medical-Device Safety.

BACKGROUND: The process of assuring the safety of medical devices is constrained by reliance on voluntary reporting of adverse events. We evaluated a strategy of prospective, active surveillance of a national clinical registry to monitor the safety of an implantable vascular-closure device that had a suspected association with increased adverse events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: We used an integrated clinical-data surveillance system to conduct a prospective, propensity-matched analysis of the safety of the Mynx vascular-closure device, as compared with alternative approved vascular-closure devices, with data from the CathPCI Registry of the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. The primary outcome was any vascular complication, which was a composite of access-site bleeding, access-site hematoma, retroperitoneal bleeding, or any vascular complication requiring intervention. Secondary safety end points were access-site bleeding requiring treatment and postprocedural blood transfusion. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 73,124 patients who had received Mynx devices after PCI procedures with femoral access from January 1, 2011, to September 30, 2013. The Mynx device was associated with a significantly greater risk of any vascular complication than were alternative vascular-closure devices (absolute risk, 1.2% vs. 0.8%; relative risk, 1.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.42 to 1.78; P<0.001); there was also a significantly greater risk of access-site bleeding (absolute risk, 0.4% vs. 0.3%; relative risk, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.62; P=0.001) and transfusion (absolute risk, 1.8% vs. 1.5%; relative risk, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.34; P<0.001). The initial alerts occurred within the first 12 months of monitoring. Relative risks were greater in three prespecified high-risk subgroups: patients with diabetes, those 70 years of age or older, and women. All safety alerts were confirmed in an independent sample of 48,992 patients from April 1, 2014, to September 30, 2015. CONCLUSIONS: A strategy of prospective, active surveillance of a clinical registry rapidly identified potential safety signals among recipients of an implantable vascular-closure device, with initial alerts occurring within the first 12 months of monitoring. (Funded by the Food and Drug Administration and others.).

Signs, symptoms, and treatment patterns across serial ambulatory cardiology visits in patients with heart failure: insights from the NCDR PINNACLE® registry.

BACKGROUND: Due to a relative lack of outpatient heart failure (HF) clinical registries, we aimed to describe symptoms, signs, and medication treatment among ambulatory patients with heart failure (HF) over time. METHODS: Using health records from 234 PINNACLE (Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence) U.S. cardiology practices (2008-2014), serial visits for patients with HF were characterized. Symptoms, signs, and HF medications (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors [ACEI], angiotensin receptor blockers [ARB], beta blockers [BB], and diuretics) were compared between visits. RESULTS: Among 763,331 patients with HF, 550,581 had ≥2 clinic visits < 1 year apart, with 2,998,444 visit pairs. In the 12 months following an index visit, patients had a mean of 2.5 ± 2.3 additional visits. Recorded index visit symptoms ranged from dyspnea (53.6%) to orthopnea (23.1%); signs ranged from peripheral edema (52.2%) to hepatomegaly (0.6%). Of those with ejection fraction < 40%, ACEI was prescribed in 58.6%, ARB in 18.5%, BB in 85.2%, and diuretics in 70.0%. Between-visit recorded changes were infrequent: dyspnea appeared in 3.8%, resolved in 2.7%; NYHA class increased in 2.9%, decreased in 2.9%; number of signs increased in 6.0%, decreased in 5.1%; ACEI/ARB or BB added in 6.4%, removed in 6.2%; diuretic added in 3.7%, removed in 3.8%. Changes in recorded symptoms were rarely associated with initiation or discontinuation in HF medication classes. CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory HF care in U.S. cardiology practices seldom recorded changes in symptoms, signs, and medication class. Although templated medical records and absence of medication dosing likely underestimated the degree to which clinical changes occur over serial visits for HF, these PINNACLE data suggest opportunities for greater symptom-based and therapy-focused visits.

Trends in U.S. Ambulatory Cardiovascular Care 2013 to 2017: JACC Review Topic of the Week.

The National Cardiovascular Data Registry PINNACLE (Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence) Registry is the largest outpatient cardiovascular practice registry in the world. It tracks real-world management and quality of 4 common cardiovascular conditions: heart failure, coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, and hypertension. In 2013, the PINNACLE Registry contained information on 2,898,505 patients, cared for by 4,859 providers in 431 practices. By 2017, the registry contained information on 6,040,996 patients, cared for by 8,853 providers in 724 practices. During this time period, care processes for PINNACLE patients generally improved. Among patients with heart failure, combined beta-blocker and renin-angiotensin antagonist medication rates increased from 60.7% to 72.8%. Among patients with coronary artery disease, statin medication rates increased from 66% to 80.1%. Among patients with atrial fibrillation, oral anticoagulation rates increased from 52.7% to 65.2%. In contrast, blood pressure control rates among patients with hypertension were largely stable. PINNACLE data also fueled a variety of quality measurement programs and 51 peer-reviewed publications.

Impact of early surveillance on safety signal identification in the CathPCI DELTA study.

OBJECTIVES: The CathPCI Data Extraction and Longitudinal Trend Analysis study was designed to determine the feasibility of conducting prospective surveillance of a large national registry to perform comparative safety analyses of medical devices. We sought to determine whether the complementary use of retrospective case data could improve safety signal detection time. DESIGN: We performed a simulated surveillance study of the comparative safety of the Mynx vascular closure device (VCD) with propensity score matched alternate VCD recipients, using both retrospective and prospective cohort data. SETTING: Centers within the USA using the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) CathPCI Registry. PARTICIPANTS: Percutaneous coronary intervention cases captured within the NCDR CathPCI Registry from July 1, 2009 to September 30, 2013 were included in the analysis. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Absolute and relative risk (RR) of any vascular complication (a composite of bleeding at access site, hematoma at access site, retroperitoneal bleeding, and other vascular complications requiring treatment); time to signal detection. RESULTS: A safety alert was detected for the primary outcome of "any vascular complication" after 15 months of surveillance and was sustained for the study duration (absolute risk of any vascular complication, 1.20% vs 0.73%, RR, 1.63; 95% CI 1.50 to 1.79; p<0.001). The safety signal was identified 12 months earlier with the use of retrospective case data than during the initial study. CONCLUSIONS: Prospective, active surveillance of cardiovascular registries is feasible to perform comparative analyses of medical devices. Retrospective data may complement prospective surveillance to improve time to signal detection, indicating the need for earlier prospective application of safety surveillance for devices new to the market.

Heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction: characterization of patients from the PINNACLE Registry®.

AIMS: Guidelines for management of patients with heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction [HFmrEF; left ventricular EF (LVEF) 41-49%] do not exist. Disagreement exists whether HFmrEF should be considered a distinct group. The aim of this study is to examine characteristics of patients with HFmrEF with HF with reduced EF (HFrEF; LVEF ≤ 40%) or preserved EF (HFpEF; LVEF ≥ 50%). METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined data collected in the American College of Cardiology's National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence (PINNACLE) Registry® for first HF patient visits between 1 May 2008 and 30 June 2016. Analysis was performed using ANOVA F-tests (or Kruskal-Wallis tests for non-normally distributed variables) for continuous parameters and χ2 tests for nominal covariates at the first diagnosed HF visit. Given the NCDR PINNACLE Registry® is a US-based registry, we opted to define HFmrEF as per the US guidelines, which define HFmrEF as LVEF 41-49% in contrast to European guidelines, which define HFmrEF as LVEF 40-49%. Among 1 103 386 patients with available data, 36.1% (N = 398 228) had HFrEF, 7.5% (N = 82 292) had HFmrEF, and 56.5% (N = 622 866) had HFpEF. Compared with patients with HFrEF or HFpEF, patients with HFmrEF had more prevalent coronary and peripheral artery disease and more history of myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, or coronary artery bypass surgery (all P < 0.001). Patients with HFmrEF were also more likely to have atrial fibrillation/flutter, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease and to have a history of tobacco use (both P < 0.001). Among those with EF assessment prior to this analysis, only 4.8% (N = 1032) previously had HFrEF that improved to HFmrEF; 32.9% (N = 7072) had HFpEF previously and progressed to HFmrEF. Those patients who transitioned from HFpEF to HFmrEF had considerably more complex profiles and were less aggressively managed compared with those who remained with HFmrEF (all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this large descriptive analysis, patients with HFmrEF had an atherothrombotic phenotype distinct from other forms of HF. Interventions aimed at treating coronary ischaemia and addressing prevalent risk factors may play a particularly important role in the management of patients with HFmrEF.

Alteration of medical therapy in patients with heart failure relative to change in symptom severity.

In this observational analysis from the Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence Registry®, we examined changes in guideline-directed medical therapies relative to changes in symptom severity in ambulatory patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, finding change in medication more often occurring when patients were changing their New York Heart Association symptom severity, rather than during periods of stable symptoms. Additionally, despite being available for a year during the time of our analysis, the use of sacubitril/valsartan was extremely low, and most often added in the context of worsening symptoms, not how this drug was studied and not how the guidelines articulate its use.

Comparative Safety of Aspiration Thrombectomy Catheters Utilizing Prospective, Active Surveillance of the NCDR CathPCI Registry.

Background Current strategies for ensuring the postmarket safety of medical devices are limited by small sample size and reliance on voluntary reporting of adverse events. Prospective, active surveillance of clinical registries may provide early warnings in the postmarket evaluation of medical device safety but has not been demonstrated in national clinical data registries. Methods and Results The CathPCI DELTA (Data Extraction and Longitudinal Trend Analysis) study was designed to assess the feasibility of prospective, active safety surveillance of medical devices within a national cardiovascular registry. We sought to assess the ability of our surveillance strategy to avoid false safety alerts by conducting an active safety surveillance study of aspiration thrombectomy catheters using data within the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI registry, where no difference in safety outcomes were anticipated for the primary in-hospital safety outcome of death and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). We performed a propensity-matched analysis of 5 aspiration thrombectomy catheter devices used during percutaneous coronary intervention among 95 925 patients presenting with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction between January 1, 2011 and September 30, 2013. After 33 months of surveillance, no safety alerts were triggered for the primary safety endpoints of death or MACE, with no between-catheter differences observed. The absolute risk of death during acute hospitalization ranged from 5.11% to 5.32% among the most commonly used aspiration thrombectomy catheter devices, with relative risks for death ranging from 0.96 to 1.03. The absolute risk of MACE ranged from 9.78% to 10.18%, with relative risks for MACE ranging from 0.99 to 1.02. There were no statistically significant differences in the rates of death or MACE between any of the aspiration thrombectomy catheter devices analyzed. Conclusions The CathPCI DELTA study demonstrates that prospective, active safety surveillance of national clinical registries is feasible to provide near-real-time safety assessments of new medical devices.

Trends in U.S. Cardiovascular Care: 2016 Report From 4 ACC National Cardiovascular Data Registries.

Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of death and disability in the United States. National programs, such as the National Cardiovascular Data Registry, facilitate assessments of the quality of care and outcomes for broad populations of patients with cardiovascular disease. This report provides data for 2014 from 4 National Cardiovascular Data Registry hospital quality programs: 1) CathPCI (Diagnostic Catheterization and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (667,424 procedures performed in 1,612 hospitals); 2) ICD Registry for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (158,649 procedures performed in 1,715 hospitals); 3) ACTION-GWTG (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network-Get With The Guidelines) for acute coronary syndromes (182,903 patients admitted to 907 hospitals); and 4) IMPACT (Improving Pediatric and Adult Congenital Treatment) for cardiac catheterization and intervention for pediatric and adult congenital heart disease (20,169 procedures in 76 hospitals). The report provides perspectives on the demographic and clinical characteristics of enrolled patients, characteristics of participating centers, and selected measures of processes and outcomes of care in these programs.

Cardiac resynchronization therapy in women versus men: observational comparative effectiveness study from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry.

BACKGROUND: Women have been under-represented in trials of cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillators (CRT-D). Previous studies suggest that women benefit from CRT-D at shorter QRS duration than men and that there may be no benefit of CRT-D in patients without left bundle branch block (LBBB) regardless of patient sex. METHODS AND RESULTS: We compared sex-specific death risk in 75 079 patients with New York Heart Association class III or IV heart failure, reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, and prolonged QRS duration (≥120 ms) receiving either CRT-D or implantable cardioverter defibrillator in subgroups according to QRS morphology and 10-ms increments in QRS duration. We applied propensity score weighting to control for differences between treatments. Among patients with LBBB, women receiving CRT-D had a lower relative death risk than those receiving an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (absolute difference, 11%; hazard ratio=0.74 [95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.81]). In men, the lower mortality with CRT-D versus implantable cardioverter defibrillator was less pronounced (absolute difference, 9%; hazard ratio=0.84 [0.79-0.89]; sex×device interaction P=0.025). In those without LBBB, the mortality difference was modest and did not differ between women and men (absolute difference, 3%; hazard ratio=0.88 [0.79-0.97] in women and absolute difference, 2%; hazard ratio=0.95 [0.91-0.998] in men; interaction P=0.17). In subgroups according to QRS duration, CRT-D was associated with better survival in both sexes with LBBB and QRS ≥130 ms, whereas there was no clear relation between QRS duration and survival in patients without LBBB regardless of patient sex. CONCLUSIONS: In a large real-world population CRT-D was associated with a lower mortality risk in both sexes with LBBB, although more pronounced among women. Only among those with LBBB, both sexes had better survival with longer QRS duration. The mortality differences in patients without LBBB were attenuated in both sexes.

Cost-effectiveness of revascularization strategies: the ASCERT study.

BACKGROUND: ASCERT (American College of Cardiology Foundation and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Collaboration on the Comparative Effectiveness of Revascularization Strategies) was a large observational study designed to compare the long-term effectiveness of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to treat coronary artery disease (CAD) over 4 to 5 years. OBJECTIVES: This study examined the cost-effectiveness of CABG versus PCI for stable ischemic heart disease. METHODS: The Society of Thoracic Surgeons and American College of Cardiology Foundation databases were linked to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services claims data. Costs for the index and observation period (2004 to 2008) hospitalizations were assessed by diagnosis-related group Medicare reimbursement rates; costs beyond the observation period were estimated from average Medicare participant per capita expenditure. Effectiveness was measured via mortality and life-expectancy data. Cost and effectiveness comparisons were adjusted using propensity score matching with the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio expressed as cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained. RESULTS: CABG patients (n = 86,244) and PCI patients (n = 103,549) were at least 65 years old with 2- or 3-vessel coronary artery disease. Adjusted costs were higher for CABG for the index hospitalization, study period, and lifetime by $10,670, $8,145, and $11,575, respectively. Patients undergoing CABG gained an adjusted average of 0.2525 and 0.3801 life-years relative to PCI over the observation period and lifetime, respectively. The life-time incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CABG compared to PCI was $30,454/QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Over a period of 4 years or longer, patients undergoing CABG had better outcomes but at higher costs than those undergoing PCI.

Angiographic validation of the American College of Cardiology Foundation-the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Collaboration on the Comparative Effectiveness of Revascularization Strategies study.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to compare angiographic interpretation of coronary arteriograms by sites in community practice versus those made by a centralized angiographic core laboratory. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study population consisted of 2013 American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry (ACC-NCDR) records with 2- and 3- vessel coronary disease from 54 sites in 2004 to 2007. The primary analysis compared Registry (NCDR)-defined 2- and 3-vessel disease versus those from an angiographic core laboratory analysis. Vessel-level kappa coefficients suggested moderate agreement between NCDR and core laboratory analysis, ranging from kappa=0.39 (95% confidence intervals, 0.32-0.45) for the left anterior descending artery to kappa=0.59 (95% confidence intervals, 0.55-0.64) for the right coronary artery. Overall, 6.3% (n=127 out of 2013) of those patients identified with multivessel disease at NCDR sites had had 0- or 1-vessel disease by core laboratory reading. There was no directional bias with regard to overcall, that is, 12.3% of cases read as 3-vessel disease by the sites were read as <3-vessel disease by the core laboratory, and 13.9% of core laboratory 3-vessel cases were read as <3-vessel by the sites. For a subset of patients with left main coronary disease, registry overcall was not linked to increased rates of mortality or myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS: There was only modest agreement between angiographic readings in clinical practice and those from an independent core laboratory. Further study will be needed because the implications for patient management are uncertain.

Sex-specific mortality risk by QRS morphology and duration in patients receiving CRT: results from the NCDR.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have suggested that women have better outcomes than men after cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D) implantation. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare mortality after CRT-D implantation by sex, QRS morphology, and duration. METHODS: Survival curves and covariate adjusted hazard ratios (HR) were used to assess mortality by sex in 31,892 CRT-D patients in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR), implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) registry between 2006 and 2009, with up to 5 years' follow-up (median 2.9 years, interquartile range: 2.0 to 3.9 years). Patients were grouped by QRS morphology and 10-ms increments in QRS duration. RESULTS: Among patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB), women had a 21% lower mortality risk than men (HR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.74 to 0.84; p < 0.001); however, there was no sex difference in non-LBBB (HR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.85 to 1.06; p = 0.37). Longer QRS duration was associated with better survival in both sexes with LBBB, but not in patients without LBBB. Compared with women with LBBB and QRS of 120 to 129 ms, women with LBBB and QRS of 140 to 149 ms had a 27% lower mortality (HR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.60 to 0.88; p = 0.001); this difference was 18% in men (HR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.71 to 0.93; p = 0.003). Mortality in LBBB and QRS of 150 ms or longer compared with those with LBBB and QRS of 120 to 129 ms was similar between sexes (HR: 0.61 to 0.68; p < 0.001 for women and HR: 0.58 to 0.66; p < 0.001 for men). Sex interactions within 10-ms groups were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with LBBB who received CRT-D, mortality is lower in women than men. Additionally, longer QRS duration in LBBB is associated with better survival in both sexes. In contrast, there is no sex difference in patients without LBBB, regardless of QRS duration. Further studies should include a non-CRT comparator group to confirm these findings.

Cardiovascular care facts: a report from the national cardiovascular data registry: 2011.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this report was to characterize the patients, participating centers, and measures of quality of care and outcomes for 5 NCDR (National Cardiovascular Data Registry) programs: 1) ACTION (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network) Registry-GWTG (Get With The Guidelines) for acute coronary syndromes; 2) CathPCI Registry for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention; 3) CARE (Carotid Artery Revascularization and Endarterectomy) Registry for carotid revascularization; 4) ICD Registry for implantable cardioverter defibrillators; and the 5) PINNACLE (Practice INNovation And CLinical Excellence) Registry for outpatients with cardiovascular disease (CVD). BACKGROUND: CVD is a leading cause of death and disability in the United States. The quality of care for patients with CVD is suboptimal. National registry programs, such as NCDR, permit assessments of the quality of care and outcomes for broad populations of patients with CVD. METHODS: For the year 2011, we assessed for each of the 5 NCDR programs: 1) demographic and clinical characteristics of enrolled patients; 2) key characteristics of participating centers; 3) measures of processes of care; and 4) patient outcomes. For selected variables, we assessed trends over time. RESULTS: In 2011 ACTION Registry-GWTG enrolled 119,967 patients in 567 hospitals; CathPCI enrolled 632,557 patients in 1,337 hospitals; CARE enrolled 4,934 patients in 130 hospitals; ICD enrolled 139,991 patients in 1,435 hospitals; and PINNACLE enrolled 249,198 patients (1,436,328 individual encounters) in 74 practices (1,222 individual providers). Data on performance metrics and outcomes, in some cases risk-adjusted with validated NCDR models, are presented. CONCLUSIONS: The NCDR provides a unique opportunity to understand the characteristics of large populations of patients with CVD, the centers that provide their care, quality of care provided, and important patient outcomes.