Duration of Device-Based Fever Prevention after Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend active fever prevention for 72 hours after cardiac arrest. Data from randomized clinical trials of this intervention have been lacking. METHODS: We randomly assigned comatose patients who had been resuscitated after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of presumed cardiac cause to device-based temperature control targeting 36°C for 24 hours followed by targeting of 37°C for either 12 or 48 hours (for total intervention times of 36 and 72 hours, respectively) or until the patient regained consciousness. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause or hospital discharge with a Cerebral Performance Category of 3 or 4 (range, 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating more severe disability; a category of 3 or 4 indicates severe cerebral disability or coma) within 90 days after randomization. Secondary outcomes included death from any cause and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment score (range, 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating better cognitive ability) at 3 months. RESULTS: A total of 393 patients were randomly assigned to temperature control for 36 hours, and 396 patients were assigned to temperature control for 72 hours. At 90 days after randomization, a primary end-point event had occurred in 127 of 393 patients (32.3%) in the 36-hour group and in 133 of 396 patients (33.6%) in the 72-hour group (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.77 to 1.26; P = 0.70) and mortality was 29.5% in the 36-hour group and 30.3% in the 72-hour group. At 3 months, the median Montreal Cognitive Assessment score was 26 (interquartile range, 24 to 29) and 27 (interquartile range, 24 to 28), respectively. There was no significant between-group difference in the incidence of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Active device-based fever prevention for 36 or 72 hours after cardiac arrest did not result in significantly different percentages of patients dying or having severe disability or coma. (Funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation; BOX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03141099.).

Blood-Pressure Targets in Comatose Survivors of Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: Evidence to support the choice of blood-pressure targets for the treatment of comatose survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest who are receiving intensive care is limited. METHODS: In a double-blind, randomized trial with a 2-by-2 factorial design, we evaluated a mean arterial blood-pressure target of 63 mm Hg as compared with 77 mm Hg in comatose adults who had been resuscitated after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest of presumed cardiac cause; patients were also assigned to one of two oxygen targets (reported separately). The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause or hospital discharge with a Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) of 3 or 4 within 90 days (range, 0 to 5, with higher categories indicating more severe disability; a category of 3 or 4 indicates severe disability or coma). Secondary outcomes included neuron-specific enolase levels at 48 hours, death from any cause, scores on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (range, 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating better cognitive ability) and the modified Rankin scale (range, 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability) at 3 months, and the CPC at 3 months. RESULTS: A total of 789 patients were included in the analysis (393 in the high-target group and 396 in the low-target group). A primary-outcome event occurred in 133 patients (34%) in the high-target group and in 127 patients (32%) in the low-target group (hazard ratio, 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.37; P = 0.56). At 90 days, 122 patients (31%) in the high-target group and 114 patients (29%) in the low-target group had died (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.46). The median CPC was 1 (interquartile range, 1 to 5) in both the high-target group and the low-target group; the corresponding median modified Rankin scale scores were 1 (interquartile range, 0 to 6) and 1 (interquartile range, 0 to 6), and the corresponding median Montreal Cognitive Assessment scores were 27 (interquartile range, 24 to 29) and 26 (interquartile range, 24 to 29). The median neuron-specific enolase level at 48 hours was also similar in the two groups. The percentages of patients with adverse events did not differ significantly between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Targeting a mean arterial blood pressure of 77 mm Hg or 63 mm Hg in patients who had been resuscitated from cardiac arrest did not result in significantly different percentages of patients dying or having severe disability or coma. (Funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation; BOX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03141099.).

Oxygen Targets in Comatose Survivors of Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: The appropriate oxygenation target for mechanical ventilation in comatose survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is unknown. METHODS: In this randomized trial with a 2-by-2 factorial design, we randomly assigned comatose adults with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in a 1:1 ratio to either a restrictive oxygen target of a partial pressure of arterial oxygen (Pao2) of 9 to 10 kPa (68 to 75 mm Hg) or a liberal oxygen target of a Pao2 of 13 to 14 kPa (98 to 105 mm Hg); patients were also assigned to one of two blood-pressure targets (reported separately). The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause or hospital discharge with severe disability or coma (Cerebral Performance Category [CPC] of 3 or 4; categories range from 1 to 5, with higher values indicating more severe disability), whichever occurred first within 90 days after randomization. Secondary outcomes were neuron-specific enolase levels at 48 hours, death from any cause, the score on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (ranging from 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating better cognitive ability), the score on the modified Rankin scale (ranging from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability), and the CPC at 90 days. RESULTS: A total of 789 patients underwent randomization. A primary-outcome event occurred in 126 of 394 patients (32.0%) in the restrictive-target group and in 134 of 395 patients (33.9%) in the liberal-target group (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 1.21; P = 0.69). At 90 days, death had occurred in 113 patients (28.7%) in the restrictive-target group and in 123 (31.1%) in the liberal-target group. On the CPC, the median category was 1 in the two groups; on the modified Rankin scale, the median score was 2 in the restrictive-target group and 1 in the liberal-target group; and on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, the median score was 27 in the two groups. At 48 hours, the median neuron-specific enolase level was 17 µg per liter in the restrictive-target group and 18 µg per liter in the liberal-target group. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Targeting of a restrictive or liberal oxygenation strategy in comatose patients after resuscitation for cardiac arrest resulted in a similar incidence of death or severe disability or coma. (Funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation; BOX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03141099.).

Effect of Implantable Cardioverter-defibrillators in Nonischemic Heart Failure According to Background Medical Therapy: Extended Follow-up of the DANISH Trial.

BACKGROUND: The Heart Failure Collaboratory (HFC) score integrates types and dosages of guideline-directed pharmacotherapies for heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We examined the effects of cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation according to the modified HFC (mHFC) score in 1116 patients with nonischemic HFrEF from the Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of ICDs in Patients with Nonischemic Systolic HF on Mortality (DANISH). METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients were assigned scores for renin-angiotensin-system inhibitors, beta-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (0, no use; 1, < 50% of maximum dosage; 2, ≥ 50% of maximum dosage). The maximum score was 6, corresponding to ≥ 50% of maximum dosage for all therapies. The median baseline mHFC score was 4, and the median follow-up was 9.5 years. Compared with an mHFC score of 3-4, an mHFC score of 1-2 was associated with a higher rate of all-cause death (mHFC = 1-2: adjusted HR 1.67 [95% CI, 1.23-2.28]; mHFC = 3-4, reference; mHFC = 5-6: adjusted HR 1.07 [95% CI, 0.87-1.31]). ICD implantation did not reduce all-cause death compared with control (reference) (HR 0.89 [95% CI, 0.74-1.08]), regardless of mHFC score (mHFC = 1-2: HR 0.98 [95% CI, 0.56-1.71]; mHFC = 3-4: HR 0.89 [95% CI,0.66-1.20]; mHFC = 5-6: HR 0.85 [95% CI, 0.64-1.12]; Pinteraction, 0.65). Similarly, ICD implantation did not reduce cardiovascular death (HR 0.87 [95% CI, 0.70-1.09]), regardless of mHFC score (Pinteraction, 0.59). The ICD group had a lower rate of sudden cardiovascular death (HR, 0.60 [95% CI,0.40-0.92]); this association was not modified by mHFC score (Pinteraction, 0.35). CONCLUSIONS: Lower mHFC scores were associated with higher rates of all-cause death. ICD implantation did not result in an overall survival benefit in patients with nonischemic HFrEF, regardless of mHFC score.

Long-Term Follow-Up of DANISH (The Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of ICDs in Patients With Nonischemic Systolic Heart Failure on Mortality).

BACKGROUND: DANISH (The Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators [ICDs] in Patients With Nonischemic Systolic Heart Failure on Mortality) found that primary-prevention ICD implantation was not associated with an overall survival benefit in patients with nonischemic systolic heart failure during a median follow-up of 5.6 years, although there was a beneficial effect on all-cause mortality in patients ≤70 years. This study presents an additional 4 years of follow-up data from DANISH. METHODS: In DANISH, 556 patients with nonischemic systolic heart failure were randomized to receive an ICD and 560 to receive usual clinical care and followed until June 30, 2016. In this long-term follow-up study, patients were followed until May 18, 2020. Analyses were conducted for the overall population and according to age (≤70 and >70 years). RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 9.5 years (25th-75th percentile, 7.9-10.9 years), 208/556 patients (37%) in the ICD group and 226/560 patients (40%) in the control group died. Compared with the control group, the ICD group did not have significantly lower all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.89, [95% CI, 0.74-1.08]; P = 0.24). In patients ≤70 years (n = 829), all-cause mortality was lower in the ICD group than the control group (117/389 [30%] versus 158/440 [36%]; HR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.61-0.99]; P = 0.04), whereas in patients >70 years (n = 287), all-cause mortality was not significantly different between the ICD and control group (91/167 [54%] versus 68/120 [57%]; HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.67-1.28]; P = 0.75). Cardiovascular death showed similar trends (overall, 147/556 [26%] versus 164/560 [29%]; HR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.70-1.09]; P = 0.20; ≤70 years, 87/389 [22%] versus 122/440 [28%]; HR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.57-0.98]; P = 0.04; >70 years, 60/167 [36%] versus 42/120 [35%]; HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.65-1.45]; P = 0.91). The ICD group had a significantly lower incidence of sudden cardiovascular death in the overall population (35/556 [6%] versus 57/560 [10%]; HR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.40-0.92]; P = 0.02) and in patients ≤70 years (19/389 [5%] versus 49/440 [11%]; HR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.24-0.71]; P = 0.0008), but not in patients >70 years (16/167 [10%] versus 8/120 [7%]; HR, 1.34 [95% CI, 0.56-3.19]; P = 0.39). CONCLUSIONS: During a median follow-up of 9.5 years, ICD implantation did not provide an overall survival benefit in patients with nonischemic systolic heart failure. In patients ≤70 years, ICD implantation was associated with a lower incidence of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, and sudden cardiovascular death. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00542945.

Rifampicin reduces plasma concentration of linezolid in patients with infective endocarditis.

BACKGROUND: Linezolid in combination with rifampicin has been used in treatment of infective endocarditis especially for patients infected with staphylococci. OBJECTIVES: Because rifampicin has been reported to reduce the plasma concentration of linezolid, the present study aimed to characterize the population pharmacokinetics of linezolid for the purpose of quantifying an effect of rifampicin cotreatment. In addition, the possibility of compensation by dosage adjustments was evaluated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Pharmacokinetic measurements were performed in 62 patients treated with linezolid for left-sided infective endocarditis in the Partial Oral Endocarditis Treatment (POET) trial. Fifteen patients were cotreated with rifampicin. A total of 437 linezolid plasma concentrations were obtained. The pharmacokinetic data were adequately described by a one-compartment model with first-order absorption and first-order elimination. RESULTS: We demonstrated a substantial increase of linezolid clearance by 150% (95% CI: 78%-251%), when combined with rifampicin. The final model was evaluated by goodness-of-fit plots showing an acceptable fit, and a visual predictive check validated the model. Model-based dosing simulations showed that rifampicin cotreatment decreased the PTA of linezolid from 94.3% to 34.9% and from 52.7% to 3.5% for MICs of 2 mg/L and 4 mg/L, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial interaction between linezolid and rifampicin was detected in patients with infective endocarditis, and the interaction was stronger than previously reported. Model-based simulations showed that increasing the linezolid dose might compensate without increasing the risk of adverse effects to the same degree.

Partial Oral versus Intravenous Antibiotic Treatment of Endocarditis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with infective endocarditis on the left side of the heart are typically treated with intravenous antibiotic agents for up to 6 weeks. Whether a shift from intravenous to oral antibiotics once the patient is in stable condition would result in efficacy and safety similar to those with continued intravenous treatment is unknown. METHODS: In a randomized, noninferiority, multicenter trial, we assigned 400 adults in stable condition who had endocarditis on the left side of the heart caused by streptococcus, Enterococcus faecalis, Staphylococcus aureus, or coagulase-negative staphylococci and who were being treated with intravenous antibiotics to continue intravenous treatment (199 patients) or to switch to oral antibiotic treatment (201 patients). In all patients, antibiotic treatment was administered intravenously for at least 10 days. If feasible, patients in the orally treated group were discharged to outpatient treatment. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, unplanned cardiac surgery, embolic events, or relapse of bacteremia with the primary pathogen, from the time of randomization until 6 months after antibiotic treatment was completed. RESULTS: After randomization, antibiotic treatment was completed after a median of 19 days (interquartile range, 14 to 25) in the intravenously treated group and 17 days (interquartile range, 14 to 25) in the orally treated group (P=0.48). The primary composite outcome occurred in 24 patients (12.1%) in the intravenously treated group and in 18 (9.0%) in the orally treated group (between-group difference, 3.1 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, -3.4 to 9.6; P=0.40), which met noninferiority criteria. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with endocarditis on the left side of the heart who were in stable condition, changing to oral antibiotic treatment was noninferior to continued intravenous antibiotic treatment. (Funded by the Danish Heart Foundation and others; POET ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01375257 .).

Self-assessed health status and associated mortality in endocarditis: secondary findings from the POET trial.

PURPOSE: Self-assessed poor health status is associated with increased risk of mortality in several cardiovascular conditions, but has not been investigated in patients with endocarditis. We examined health status and mortality in patients with endocarditis. METHODS: This is a re-specified substudy of the randomized POET endocarditis trial, which included 400 patients. Patients completed the single-question self-assessed health status from the Short-Form 36 questionnaire at time of randomization and were categorized as having poor or non-poor (excellent/very good, good, or fair) health status. Self-assessed health status and all-cause mortality were examined by a Cox regression model. RESULTS: Self-assessed health status was completed by 266 (67%) patients with a mean age of 68.0 years (± 11.8), 54 (20%) were females, and 86 (32%) had one or more major concurrent medical conditions besides endocarditis. The self-assessed health status distribution was poor (n = 21, 8%) and non-poor (n = 245, 92%). The median follow-up was 3.3 years and death occurred in 9 (43%) and 48 (20%) patients reporting poor and non-poor health status, respectively, and mortality rates [mortality/100 person-years, 95% confidence interval (CI)] were 18.1 (95% CI 9.4-34.8) and 5.4 (95% CI 4.1-7.2), i.e., the crude hazard ratio for death was 3.4 (95% CI: 1.7-7.0, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Self-assessed poor health status compared with non-poor health status as assessed by a single question was associated with a threefold increased long-term mortality in patients with endocarditis. POET ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01375257. TRIAL REGISTRY: POET ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01375257.

Is It Safe to Mobilize Patients Very Early After Transfemoral Coronary Procedures? (SAMOVAR): A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Coronary angiography (CAG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are performed via the femoral or radial arteries. In patients examined via transfemoral access, closure devices facilitate hemostasis, but it is unknown whether it is safe to mobilize these patients immediately and how acceptable this may be in terms of patient comfort. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to investigate bleeding complications in patients mobilized immediately after transfemoral CAG or PCI compared with patients on bed rest (BR) for 2 hours after the procedure and, furthermore, to investigate patient comfort in relation to mobilization and BR. METHODS: SAMOVAR was a noninferiority trial with patients randomized to immediate mobilization (IM) or 2 hours of BR after transfemoral CAG or PCI and use of the AngioSeal as a closure device and reversal of heparin effect. The primary end point was development of hematoma greater than 5 cm, pseudoaneurysm, or bleeding requiring blood transfusion. Secondary end points were oozing from the puncture site, small hematoma, and patient comfort. RESULTS: Of 2027 patients (IM, 1010; BR, 1017), 40% underwent PCI. The primary outcome was recorded in 0.7% patients randomized to IM versus 0.5% in BR ( P = .58). There was no difference in the incidence of small hematoma, whereas persistent oozing was seen slightly more often after IM compared with BR (12% vs 9%, P = .04). Patients mobilized immediately reported less back pain and micturition problems ( P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients who had CAG and PCI performed through transfemoral access, reversal of anticoagulation and use of closure devices allowed IM with low rates of complications and improved patient comfort.

Defibrillator Implantation in Patients with Nonischemic Systolic Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) in patients with symptomatic systolic heart failure caused by coronary artery disease has been well documented. However, the evidence for a benefit of prophylactic ICDs in patients with systolic heart failure that is not due to coronary artery disease has been based primarily on subgroup analyses. The management of heart failure has improved since the landmark ICD trials, and many patients now receive cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). METHODS: In a randomized, controlled trial, 556 patients with symptomatic systolic heart failure (left ventricular ejection fraction, ≤35%) not caused by coronary artery disease were assigned to receive an ICD, and 560 patients were assigned to receive usual clinical care (control group). In both groups, 58% of the patients received CRT. The primary outcome of the trial was death from any cause. The secondary outcomes were sudden cardiac death and cardiovascular death. RESULTS: After a median follow-up period of 67.6 months, the primary outcome had occurred in 120 patients (21.6%) in the ICD group and in 131 patients (23.4%) in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68 to 1.12; P=0.28). Sudden cardiac death occurred in 24 patients (4.3%) in the ICD group and in 46 patients (8.2%) in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.82; P=0.005). Device infection occurred in 27 patients (4.9%) in the ICD group and in 20 patients (3.6%) in the control group (P=0.29). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, prophylactic ICD implantation in patients with symptomatic systolic heart failure not caused by coronary artery disease was not associated with a significantly lower long-term rate of death from any cause than was usual clinical care. (Funded by Medtronic and others; DANISH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00542945 .).

The effect of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in patients with diabetes and non-ischaemic systolic heart failure.

AIMS: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation reduce the risk of sudden cardiac death, but not all-cause death in patients with non-ischaemic systolic heart failure (HF). Whether co-existence of diabetes affects ICD treatment effects is unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined the effect of ICD implantation on risk of all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and sudden cardiac death (SCD) according to diabetes status at baseline in the Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of ICDs in Patients with Non-ischaemic Systolic Heart Failure on Mortality (DANISH) trial. Outcomes were analysed by use of cumulative incidence curves and Cox regressions models. Of the 1116 patients enrolled, 211 (19%) had diabetes at baseline. Patients with diabetes were more obese, had worse kidney function and more were in New York Heart Association Class III/IV. The risk of device infections and other complications in the ICD group was similar among patients with and without diabetes (6.1% vs. 4.6% P = 0.54). Irrespective of treatment group, diabetes was associated with higher risk of all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and SCD. The treatment effect of ICD in patients with diabetes vs. patients without diabetes was hazard ratio (HR) = 0.92 (0.57-1.50) vs. HR = 0.85 (0.63-1.13); Pinteraction = 0.60 for all-cause mortality, HR = 0.99 (0.58-1.70) vs. HR = 0.70 (0.48-1.01); Pinteraction = 0.25 for cardiovascular death, and HR = 0.81 (0.35-1.88) vs. HR = 0.40 (0.22-0.76); Pinteraction = 0.16 for sudden cardiac death. CONCLUSION: Among patients with non-ischaemic systolic HF, diabetes was associated with higher incidence of all-cause mortality, primarily driven by cardiovascular mortality including SCD. Treatment effect of ICD therapy was not significantly modified by diabetes which might be due to lack of power.

The impact of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation on health-related quality of life in the DANISH trial.

AIM: The Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators (ICD) in Patients with Non-ischaemic Systolic Heart Failure (HF) on Mortality (DANISH) found no overall effect on all-cause mortality. The effect of ICD implantation on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) remains to be established as previous trials have demonstrated conflicting results. We investigated the impact of ICD implantation on HRQoL in patients with non-ischaemic systolic HF, a prespecified secondary endpoint in DANISH. METHODS AND RESULTS: In DANISH, a total of 1116 patients with non-ischaemic systolic HF were randomly assigned (1:1) to ICD implantation or usual clinical care (control). Patients completed disease-specific HRQoL as assessed by Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ; 0-105, high indicating worse). Changes in HRQoL 8 months after randomization were assessed with a mixed-effects model. At randomization, MLHFQ was completed by 935 (84%) patients (n = 472 in the ICD group and n = 463 in the control group) and was reassessed in 274 (58%) and 292 (63%) patients, respectively after 8 months for the primary analysis. Patients in the ICD group vs. the control group had similar improvements in MLHFQ after 8 months [least square mean -7.0 vs. -4.2 (P = 0.13)]. A clinically relevant improvement (decrease ≥5) in the MLHFQ overall score at 8 months was observed in 151 patients in the ICD group and 148 patients in the control group [55% vs. 51%, respectively (P = 0.25)]. CONCLUSION: Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation in patients with non-ischaemic systolic HF did not significantly alter HRQoL compared with patients randomized to usual clinical care.

Age and Outcomes of Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators in Patients With Nonischemic Systolic Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: The DANISH study (Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of ICDs [Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators] in Patients With Non-Ischemic Systolic Heart Failure on Mortality) did not demonstrate an overall effect on all-cause mortality with ICD implantation. However, the prespecified subgroup analysis suggested a possible age-dependent association between ICD implantation and mortality with survival benefit seen only in the youngest patients. The nature of this relationship between age and outcome of a primary prevention ICD in patients with nonischemic systolic heart failure warrants further investigation. METHODS: All 1116 patients from the DANISH study were included in this prespecified subgroup analysis. We assessed the relationship between ICD implantation and mortality by age, and an optimal age cutoff was estimated nonparametrically with selection impact curves. Modes of death were divided into sudden cardiac death and nonsudden death and compared between patients younger and older than this age cutoff with the use of χ2 analysis. RESULTS: Median age of the study population was 63 years (range, 21-84 years). There was a linearly decreasing relationship between ICD and mortality with age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.003-1.06; P=0.03). An optimal age cutoff for ICD implantation was present at ≤70 years. There was an association between reduced all-cause mortality and ICD in patients ≤70 years of age (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.51-0.96; P=0.03) but not in patients >70 years of age (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.68-1.62; P=0.84). For patients ≤70 years old, the sudden cardiac death rate was 1.8 (95% CI, 1.3-2.5) and nonsudden death rate was 2.7 (95% CI, 2.1-3.5) events per 100 patient-years, whereas for patients >70 years old, the sudden cardiac death rate was 1.6 (95% CI, 0.8-3.2) and nonsudden death rate was 5.4 (95% CI, 3.7-7.8) events per 100 patient-years. This difference in modes of death between the 2 age groups was statistically significant (P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with systolic heart failure not caused by ischemic heart disease, the association between the ICD and survival decreased linearly with increasing age. In this study population, an age cutoff for ICD implantation at ≤70 years yielded the highest survival for the population as a whole. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00542945.

Comparison between patients included in randomized controlled trials of ischemic heart disease and real-world data. A nationwide study.

BACKGROUND: The objective was to compare patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) who were included in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (trial participants) with patients who were not included (nonparticipants) on a trial-by-trial basis and according to indication for PCI. METHODS: In this cohort study, we compared patients with IHD who were randomized in RCTs in relation to undergoing PCI in Denmark between 2011 and 2015 were considered as RCT-participants in this study. The RCT-participants were compared with contemporary nonparticipants with IHD undergoing PCI in the same period, and they were identified using unselected national registry data. The primary end point was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: A total of 10,317 (30%) patients were included in 10 relevant RCTs (trial participants), and a total of 23,644 (70%) contemporary patients did not participate (nonparticipants). In all the included RCTs, nonparticipants had higher hazard ratios for mortality compared to trial participants (P < .001). Among all patients treated with PCI, the pooled estimates showed a significantly higher mortality rate for nonparticipants compared to trial participants (hazard ratio: 2.03, 95% CI: 1.88-2.19) (P < .001). When patients were stratified according to indication for PCI, the pooled estimates showed a significantly lower mortality rate for trial participants compared to nonparticipants in all strata (P for all < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Trial participants in recently performed RCTs including patients undergoing PCI were not representative of the general population of patients with IHD treated with PCI according to clinical characteristics and mortality. The difference in mortality was found irrespective of the indication for PCI. Thus, results from RCTs including patients undergoing PCI should be extrapolated with caution to the general patient population.

Myocardial perfusion 320-row multidetector computed tomography-guided treatment strategy for the clinical management of patients with recent acute-onset chest pain: Design of the CArdiac cT in the treatment of acute CHest pain (CATCH)-2 randomized controlled trial.

AIMS: Patients admitted with chest pain are a diagnostic challenge because the majority does not have coronary artery disease (CAD). Assessment of CAD with coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) is safe, cost-effective, and accurate, albeit with a modest specificity. Stress myocardial computed tomography perfusion (CTP) has been shown to increase the specificity when added to CCTA, without lowering the sensitivity. This article describes the design of a randomized controlled trial, CATCH-2, comparing a clinical diagnostic management strategy of CCTA alone against CCTA in combination with CTP. METHODS: Patients with acute-onset chest pain older than 50 years and with at least one cardiovascular risk factor for CAD are being prospectively enrolled to this study from 6 different clinical sites since October 2013. A total of 600 patients will be included. Patients are randomized 1:1 to clinical management based on CCTA or on CCTA in combination with CTP, determining the need for further testing with invasive coronary angiography including measurement of the fractional flow reserve in vessels with coronary artery lesions. Patients are scanned with a 320-row multidetector computed tomography scanner. Decisions to revascularize the patients are taken by the invasive cardiologist independently of the study allocation. The primary end point is the frequency of revascularization. Secondary end points of clinical outcome are also recorded. DISCUSSION: The CATCH-2 will determine whether CCTA in combination with CTP is diagnostically superior to CCTA alone in the management of patients with acute-onset chest pain.

New York Heart Association functional class and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in non-ischaemic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: Extended follow-up of the DANISH trial.

AIMS: Current guidelines recommend implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy in patients with heart failure, a left ventricular ejection fraction of ≤35%, and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II-III. However, the evidence regarding the benefit of primary prevention ICD is less consistent in patients with NYHA class III. We investigated the long-term effects of primary prevention ICD implantation according to NYHA class in an extended follow-up study of the DANISH trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: The DANISH trial randomized 1116 patients with non-ischaemic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) to ICD implantation or usual care. Outcomes were analysed according to NYHA class at baseline (NYHA class II and III/IV). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Of the 1116 patients randomized in the DANISH trial, 597 (53.5%) were in NYHA class II at baseline, 505 (45.3%) in NYHA class III, and 14 (1.3%) in NYHA class IV. During a median follow-up of 9.5 years, NYHA class III/IV, compared with NYHA class II, were associated with a greater long-term rate of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.20-1.93) and cardiovascular death (HR 1.95 [1.47-2.60]). ICD implantation, compared with usual care, did not reduce the long-term rate of all-cause mortality (all participants: HR 0.89 [95% CI 0.74-1.08]; NYHA class II: HR 0.85 [0.64-1.13]; NYHA class III/IV: HR 0.89 [0.69-1.14]; pinteraction = 0.78) or cardiovascular death (all participants: HR 0.87 [95% CI 0.70-1.09]; NYHA class II: HR 0.78 [0.54-1.12]; NYHA class III/IV: HR 0.89 [0.67-1.19]; pinteraction = 0.58), irrespective of NYHA class. Similarly, NYHA class did not modify the beneficial effects of ICD implantation on sudden cardiovascular death (all participants: HR 0.60 [95% CI 0.40-0.92]; NYHA class II: HR 0.73 [0.40-1.36]; NYHA class III/IV: HR 0.52 [0.29-0.94]; pinteraction = 0.39). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with non-ischaemic HFrEF, ICD implantation, compared with usual care, did not reduce the overall mortality rate, but it did reduce sudden cardiovascular death, regardless of baseline NYHA class. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00542945.

The importance of nonobstructive plaque characteristics in symptomatic and asymptomatic coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: We examined obstructive and nonobstructive plaque volumes in populations with subclinical and clinically manifested coronary artery disease (CAD) using quantitative computed tomography (QCT). METHODS: 855 participants with CAD (274 asymptomatic individuals, 254 acute chest pain patients without acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and 327 patients with ACS) underwent QCT of proximal coronary segments to assess participant-level plaque volumes of dense calcium, fibrous, fibrofatty, and necrotic core tissue. RESULTS: Nonobstructive (<50% stenosis) plaque volumes were greater than obstructive plaque volumes, irrespective of population (all p<0.0001): Asymptomatic individuals (mean (95% CI)): 218 [190-250] vs. 16 [12-22] mm3; acute chest pain patients without ACS: 300 [263-341] vs. 51 [41-62] mm3; patients with ACS: 370 [332-412] vs. 159 [139-182] mm3. After multivariable adjustment, nonobstructive fibrous and fibrofatty tissue volumes were greater in acute chest pain patients without ACS compared to asymptomatic individuals (fibrous tissue: 122 [107-139] vs. 175 [155-197] mm3, p<0.01; fibrofatty tissue: 44 [38-50] vs. 71 [63-80] mm3, p<0.01. Necrotic core tissue was greater in ACS patients (29 [26-33] mm3) compared to both asymptomatic individuals (15 [13-18] mm3, p<0.0001) and acute chest pain patients without ACS (21 [18-24] mm3, p<0.05). Nonobstructive dense calcium volumes did not differ between the three populations: 29 [24-36], 29 [23-35], and 41 [34-48] mm3, p>0.3 respectively. CONCLUSION: Nonobstructive CAD was the predominant contributor to total atherosclerotic plaque volume in both subclinical and clinically manifested CAD. Nonobstructive fibrous, fibrofatty and necrotic core tissue volumes increased with worsening clinical presentation, while nonobstructive dense calcium tissue volumes did not.

Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator in Nonischemic Systolic Heart Failure: Extended Follow-Up of DANISH.

BACKGROUND: Patients with heart failure and chronic kidney disease (CKD) may have an increased risk of death from causes competing with arrhythmic death, which could have implications for the efficacy of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs). We examined the long-term effects of primary prophylactic ICD implantation, compared with usual care, according to baseline CKD status in an extended follow-up study of DANISH (Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of ICDs in Patients With Nonischemic Systolic Heart Failure on Mortality). METHODS AND RESULTS: In the DANISH trial, 1116 patients with nonischemic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction were randomized to receive an ICD (N=556) or usual care (N=550). Outcomes were analyzed according to CKD status (estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥/<60 mL/min per 1.73 m2) at baseline. In total, 1113 patients had an available estimated glomerular filtration rate measurement at baseline (median estimated glomerular filtration rate 73 mL/min per 1.73 m2), and 316 (28%) had CKD. During a median follow-up of 9.5 years, ICD implantation, compared with usual care, did not reduce the rate of all-cause mortality (no CKD, HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.64-1.04]; CKD, HR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.75-1.38]; Pinteraction=0.31) or cardiovascular death (no CKD, HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.58-1.03]; CKD, HR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.73-1.51]; Pinteraction=0.20), irrespective of baseline CKD status. Similarly, baseline CKD status did not modify the beneficial effects of ICD implantation on sudden cardiovascular death (no CKD, HR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.32-1.00]; CKD, HR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.34-1.24]; Pinteraction=0.70). CONCLUSIONS: ICD implantation, compared with usual care, did not reduce the overall mortality rate, but it did reduce the rate of sudden cardiovascular death, regardless of baseline kidney function in patients with nonischemic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00542945.

Rehospitalisations, repeated aortic surgery, and death in initial survivors of surgery for Stanford type A aortic dissection and the significance of age - a nationwide registry-based cohort study.

AIMS: Describe and compare incidences across age groups of rehospitalization, repeated aortic surgery, and death in patients who survived surgery and hospitalization for type A aortic dissection. METHODS AND RESULTS: From Danish nationwide registries, we identified patients hospitalized with Stanford type A aortic dissections (2006-2018). Survivors of hospitalization and surgery on the ascending aorta and/or aortic arch comprised the study population (n = 606, 36 (38.9%) <60 years old (group I), 194 (32.0%) 60-69 years old (group II), and 176 (29.1%) >69 years old (group III)). During the first year, 62.5% were re-hospitalized and 1.4% underwent repeated aortic surgery with no significant differences across age groups (P = 0.68 and P = 0.39, respectively). Further, 5.9% died (group I: 3.0%, group II: 8.3%, group III: 7.4%, P = 0.04). After 10 years, 8.0% had undergone repeated aortic surgery (group I: 11.5%, group II: 8.5%, group III: 1.6%, P = 0.04) and 10.2% (group I), 17.0% (group II), and 22.2% (group III) had died (P = 0.01). Using multivariable Cox regression analysis, we described long-term outcomes comparing age groups. No age differences were found in one-year outcomes, while age > 69 years compared with age < 60 years was associated with a lower rate of repeated aortic surgery [hazard ratio 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04-0.78] and a higher rate of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 2.44, 95% CI 1.37-4.34) in the 10-year analyses. CONCLUSION: Rehospitalisations in the first year after discharge were common in all age groups, but survival was high. Repeated aortic surgery was significantly more common among younger than older patients.