Development and validation of an automated algorithm for end point adjudication for a large U.S. national registry.

BACKGROUND: Clinical events committee (CEC) evaluation is the standard approach for end point adjudication in clinical trials. Due to resource constraints, large registries typically rely on site-reported end points without further confirmation, which may preclude use for regulatory oversight. METHODS: We developed a novel automated adjudication algorithm (AAA) for end point adjudication in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion (LAAO) Registry using an iterative process using CEC adjudication as the "gold standard." A ≥80% agreement rate between automated algorithm adjudication and CEC adjudication was prespecified as clinically acceptable. Agreement rates were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 92 in-hospital and 127 post-discharge end points were evaluated between January 1, 2016 and June 30, 2019 using AAA and CEC. Agreement for neurologic events was >90%. Percent agreement for in-hospital and post-discharge events was as follows: ischemic stroke 95.7% and 94.5%, hemorrhagic stroke 97.8% and 96.1%, undetermined stroke 97.8% and 99.2%, transient ischemic attack 98.9% and 98.4% and intracranial hemorrhage 100.0% and 94.5%. Agreement was >80% for major bleeding (83.7% and 90.6%) and major vascular complication (89.1% and 97.6%). With this approach, <1% of site reported end points require CEC adjudication. Agreement remained very good during the period after algorithm derivation. CONCLUSIONS: An AAA-guided approach for end point adjudication was successfully developed and validated for the LAAO Registry. With this approach, the need for formal CEC adjudication was substantially reduced, with accuracy maintained above an 80% agreement threshold. After application specific validation, these methods could be applied to large registries and clinical trials to reduce the cost of event adjudication while preserving scientific validity.

The bleeding risk treatment paradox at the physician and hospital level: Implications for reducing bleeding in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: Bleeding is a common and costly complication of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Bleeding avoidance strategies (BAS) are used paradoxically less in patients at high-risk of bleeding: "bleeding risk-treatment paradox" (RTP). We determined whether hospitals and physicians, who do not align BAS to PCI patients' bleeding risk (ie, exhibit a RTP) have higher bleeding rates. METHODS: We examined 28,005 PCIs from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry for 7 hospitals comprising BJC HealthCare. BAS included transradial intervention, bivalirudin, and vascular closure devices. Patients' predicted bleeding risk was based on National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI bleeding model and categorized as low (<2.0%), moderate (2.0%-6.4%), or high (≥6.5%) risk tertiles. BAS use was considered risk-concordant if: at least 1 BAS was used for moderate risk; 2 BAS were used for high risk and bivalirudin or vascular closure devices were not used for low risk. Absence of risk-concordant BAS use was defined as RTP. We analyzed inter-hospital and inter-physician variation in RTP, and the association of RTP with post-PCI bleeding. RESULTS: Amongst 28,005 patients undergoing PCI by 103 physicians at 7 hospitals, RTP was observed in 12,035 (43%) patients. RTP was independently associated with a higher likelihood of bleeding even after adjusting for predicted bleeding risk, mortality risk and potential sources of variation (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.44-1.92, P < .001). A higher prevalence of RTP strongly and independently correlated with worse bleeding rates, both at the physician-level (Wilk's Lambda 0.9502, F-value 17.21, P < .0001) and the hospital-level (Wilk's Lambda 0.9899, F-value 35.68, P < .0001). All the results were similar in a subset of PCIs conducted since 2015 - a period more reflective of the contemporary practice. CONCLUSIONS: Bleeding RTP is a strong, independent predictor of bleeding. It exists at the level of physicians and hospitals: those with a higher rate of RTP had worse bleeding rates. These findings not only underscore the importance of recognizing bleeding risk upfront and using BAS in a risk-aligned manner, but also inform and motivate national efforts to reduce PCI-related bleeding.

The Evolving Landscape of Impella Use in the United States Among Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Mechanical Circulatory Support.

BACKGROUND: Impella was approved for mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in 2008, but large-scale, real-world data on its use are lacking. Our objective was to describe trends and variations in Impella use, clinical outcomes, and costs across US hospitals in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) treated with MCS (Impella or intra-aortic balloon pump). METHODS: From the Premier Healthcare Database, we analyzed 48 306 patients undergoing PCI with MCS at 432 hospitals between January 2004 and December 2016. Association analyses were performed at 3 levels: time period, hospital, and patient. Hierarchical models with propensity adjustment were used for association analyses. We examined trends and variations in the proportion of Impella use, and associated clinical outcomes (in-hospital mortality, bleeding requiring transfusion, acute kidney injury, stroke, length of stay, and hospital costs). RESULTS: Among patients undergoing PCI treated with MCS, 4782 (9.9%) received Impella; its use increased over time, reaching 31.9% of MCS in 2016. There was wide variation in Impella use across hospitals (>5-fold variation). Specifically, among patients receiving Impella, there was a wide variation in outcomes of bleeding (>2.5-fold variation), and death, acute kidney injury, and stroke (all ≈1.5-fold variation). Adverse outcomes and costs were higher in the Impella era (years 2008-2016) versus the pre-Impella era (years 2004-2007). Hospitals with higher Impella use had higher rates of adverse outcomes and costs. After adjustment for the propensity score, and accounting for clustering of patients by hospitals, Impella use was associated with death: odds ratio, 1.24 (95% CI, 1.13-1.36); bleeding: odds ratio, 1.10 (95% CI, 1.00-1.21); and stroke: odds ratio, 1.34 (95% CI, 1.18-1.53), although a similar, nonsignificant result was observed for acute kidney injury: odds ratio, 1.08 (95% CI, 1.00-1.17). CONCLUSIONS: Impella use is rapidly increasing among patients undergoing PCI treated with MCS, with marked variability in its use and associated outcomes. Although unmeasured confounding cannot be ruled out, when analyzed by time periods, or at the hospital level or the patient level, Impella use was associated with higher rates of adverse events and costs. More data are needed to define the appropriate role of MCS in patients undergoing PCI.

Bleeding avoidance strategies and percutaneous coronary intervention outcomes: A 10-year observation from a Japanese Multicenter Registry.

BACKGROUND: Bleeding avoidance strategies (BASs) are increasingly adopted for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) due to bleeding complications. However, their association with bleeding events outside of Western countries remains unclear. In collaboration with the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) CathPCI registry, we aimed to assess the time trend and impact of BAS utilization among Japanese patients. METHODS: Our study included 19,656 consecutive PCI patients registered over 10 years. These patients were divided into 4-time frame groups (T1: 2008-2011, T2: 2012-2013, T3: 2014-2015, and T4: 2016-2018). BAS was defined as the use of transradial approach or vascular closure device (VCD) use after transfemoral approach (TFA). Model performance of the NCDR CathPCI bleeding model was evaluated. The degree of bleeding reduction associated with BAS adoption was estimated via multilevel mixed-effects multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The NCDR CathPCI bleeding risk score demonstrated good discrimination in the Japanese population (C-statistics 0.79-0.81). The BAS adoption rate increased from 43% (T1) to 91% (T4), whereas the crude CathPCI-defined bleeding rate decreased from 10% (T1) to 7% (T4). Adjusted odds ratios for bleeding events were 0.25 (95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.45, P< .001) for those undergoing TFA with VCD in T4 and 0.26 (95% confidence interval 0.20-0.35, P< .001) for transradial approach in T4 compared to patients that received TFA without VCD in T1. CONCLUSIONS: BAS use over the studied time frames was associated with lower risk of bleeding complications among Japanese. Nonetheless, observed bleeding rates remained higher compared to the US population.

The association of multimorbidity to mortality in older adults after permanent pacemaker placement.

BACKGROUND: In the United States 2018 bradycardia guideline, the current class III recommendation that patients with permanent pacemaker (PPM) indications and high multimorbidity burden may not have meaningful clinical benefit from PPM therapy is based on limited data. METHODS: Observational study (January 1, 2008-December 31, 2015) of adults ≥65 years (N = 16,678) who underwent PPM implantation. Exposure variable: Elixhauser comorbidity number (ECN, 29 well-validated conditions). PRIMARY OUTCOME: ≤1-year mortality; secondary outcome: > 1-year mortality. RESULTS: Those who died ≤1-year were older, had a lower body mass index (BMI), and higher ECN (p < .001). Cumulative survival at 1-year was 92.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 91.9-92.7). One-year survival decreased by increasing ECN-with a difference at 1-year between lowest and highest ECN category of 17.3% (ECN 0-1: 97.1% [95% CI: 96.3-97.7]; ECN ≥8: 79.8% [95% CI: 77.9-81.5]). For those who survived the first year, cumulative survival at 8-years was 51.2% (95% CI = 49.8-52.6) with a difference between ECN 0-1 and ≥8 of 43.4%. Increasing ECN was associated equally with ≤1-year (HR 1.28 [95% CI: 1.25-1.30]) and >1-year (HR 1.19 [95% CI: 1.17-1.20]) mortality. A predictive model including age, sex, BMI, PPM type, race, and ECN had greater discriminative ability (p < .0001) than a bedside model (age, sex) for the primary outcome. CONCLUSION: Across the heterogeneity of indications for PPM placement, multimorbidity is increasingly common. The association of multimorbidity to mortality (≤1-year, >1-year) should be routinely discussed during the shared decision-making process as an important prognostic geriatric domain variable.

Development of a measure of decision quality for implantable defibrillators.

BACKGROUND: CMS reimbursement guidelines for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) include mandated shared decision making (SDM), but without any manner of assessing the quality of decisions made. We developed and tested a scale meant to assess patients' knowledge of and preferences specific to ICDs. Such a tool would assess these constructs in the clinical environment, targeting resources and support for patients considering a primary prevention ICD. METHODS: Development of the ICD decision quality (ICD-DQ) scale included (1) item creation, (2) content validation using surveys of patients (n = 23) and clinicians (n = 31), and (3) examination of validity and reliability using a survey of patients who previously received an ICD (n = 295, response rate = 72%). RESULTS: The final scale consists of 12 knowledge and 8 preference items. With respect to content validity, clinician and patient respondents agreed on the importance of 19 of 24 candidate knowledge items (79%), and 9 of 11 treatment preference items (81%). Knowledge items exhibited moderate internal validity (α = 0.62, 1 factor), strong test-retest reliability (mean % correct at first administration = 59%, 62% at follow-up, P > .1) and discriminant validity (59% correct for patients, 93% among cardiologists). Short versions of the ICD-DQ were developed for clinical settings, the scores from both of which correlated with the long version in this cohort (11-item (r = 0.90) and a 5-item (r = 0.75)). CONCLUSIONS: The ICD-DQ fills a critical gap in measuring the quality of patients' ICD decisions. They may be used to evaluate the effectiveness of patient decision aids or the quality of SDM in clinical practice.

Development and piloting of four decision aids for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in different media formats.

BACKGROUND: Using DAs for preference-sensitive decisions is an evidence-based way to improve patient-centered decisions. Reimbursement mandates have increased the need for DAs in ICD care, although none have been formally evaluated. The objectives were to develop and pilot implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) decision aids (DAs) for patients considering primary prevention ICDs. METHODS: Development Phase: An expert panel, including patients and physicians, iteratively developed four DAs: a one-page Option GridTM conversation aid, a four-page in-depth paper tool, a 17-minute video, and an interactive website. Trial Phase: At three sites, patients with heart failure who were eligible for primary prevention ICDs were randomly assigned 2:1 to intervention (received DAs) or control (usual care). We conducted a mixed-methods evaluation exploring acceptability and feasibility. RESULTS: Twenty-one eligible patients enrolled (15 intervention). Most intervention participants found the DAs to be unbiased (67%), helpful (89%), and would recommend them to others (100%). The pilot was feasible at all sites; however, using clinic staff to identify eligible patients was more efficient than chart review. Although the main goals were to measure acceptability and feasibility, intervention participants trended towards increased concordance between longevity values and ICD decisions (71% concordant vs. 29%, p = .06). Participants preferred the in-depth paper tool and video DAs. Access to a nurse during the decision-making window encouraged questions and improved participant-perceived confidence. CONCLUSIONS: Participants felt the DAs provided helpful, balanced information that they would recommend to other patients. Further exploration of this larger context of DA use and strategies to promote independent use related to electrophysiology (EP) visits are needed.

Characteristics of High Cardiovascular Risk in 1.7 Million Chinese Adults.

Background: As cardiovascular risk increases in China, interest in strategies to mitigate it is growing. However, national information about the prevalence and treatment of high cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk is limited. Objective: To assess the prevalence and treatment of high CVD risk as well as variations in risk across population subgroups. Design: National project of CVD screening and management. Setting: 141 county-level regions in all 31 provinces of China. Participants: Local residents aged 35 to 75 years. Measurements: Rates of high CVD risk were assessed both in the overall study population and by age, sex, body mass index, geographic region, and socioeconomic status. Multivariable mixed models were fitted to assess the associations between individual characteristics and high CVD risk. Statin and aspirin use was evaluated among persons at high risk for CVD. Results: Among 1 680 126 participants, 9.5% (95% CI, 9.5% to 9.6%) had high risk for CVD. Mixed models identified persons who were of Han ethnicity, had medical insurance, were currently using alcohol, or were obese as more likely to be at high risk for CVD. Of those with high CVD risk, only 0.6% (CI, 0.5% to 0.6%) and 2.4% (CI, 2.3% to 2.5%) reported using statins and aspirin, respectively. Among persons with high CVD risk and hypertension, 31.8% were receiving antihypertensive medications. Limitation: Samples were not nationally representative. Conclusion: Of the 1.7 million participants, 1 in 10 had a high risk for CVD; among those at high risk, fewer than 3% were receiving statins or aspirin. An immense opportunity exists for risk mitigation in this substantial population. Primary Funding Source: Ministry of Finance and National Health Commission, China.

Association Between Industry Payments to Physicians and Device Selection in ICD Implantation.

Importance: Little is known about the association between industry payments and medical device selection. Objective: To examine the association between payments from device manufacturers to physicians and device selection for patients undergoing first-time implantation of a cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) or cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D). Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, patients who received a first-time ICD or CRT-D device from any of the 4 major manufacturers (January 1, 2016-December 31, 2018) were identified. The data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry was linked with the Open Payments Program's payment data. Patients were categorized into 4 groups (A, B, C, and D) corresponding to the manufacturer from which the physician who performed the implantation received the largest payment. For each patient group, the proportion of patients who received a device from the manufacturer that provided the largest payment to the physician who performed implantation was determined. Within each group, the absolute difference in proportional use of devices between the manufacturer that made the highest payment and the proportion of devices from the same manufacturer in the entire study cohort (expected prevalence) was calculated. Exposures: Manufacturers' payments to physicians who performed an ICD or CRT-D implantation. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome of the study was the manufacturer of the device used for the implantation. Results: Over a 3-year period, 145 900 patients (median age, 65 years; 29.6% women) received ICD or CRT-D devices from the 4 manufacturers implanted by 4435 physicians at 1763 facilities. Among these physicians, 4152 (94%) received payments from device manufacturers ranging from $2 to $323 559 with a median payment of $1211 (interquartile range, $390-$3702). Between 38.5% and 54.7% of patients received devices from the manufacturers that had provided physicians with the largest payments. Patients were substantially more likely to receive devices made by the manufacturer that provided the largest payment to the physician who performed implantation than they were from each other individual manufacturer. The absolute differences in proportional use from the expected prevalence were 22.4% (95% CI, 21.9%-22.9%) for manufacturer A; 14.5% (95% CI, 14.0%-15.0%) for manufacturer B; 18.8% (95% CI, 18.2%-19.4%) for manufacturer C; and 30.6% (95% CI, 30.0%-31.2%) for manufacturer D. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, a large proportion of ICD or CRT-D implantations were performed by physicians who received payments from device manufacturers. Patients were more likely to receive ICD or CRT-D devices from the manufacturer that provided the highest total payment to the physician who performed an ICD or CRT-D implantation than each other manufacturer individually.

Association of Use of an Intravascular Microaxial Left Ventricular Assist Device vs Intra-aortic Balloon Pump With In-Hospital Mortality and Major Bleeding Among Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock.

Importance: Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Although intravascular microaxial left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) provide greater hemodynamic support as compared with intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABPs), little is known about clinical outcomes associated with intravascular microaxial LVAD use in clinical practice. Objective: To examine outcomes among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for AMI complicated by cardiogenic shock treated with mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices. Design, Setting, and Participants: A propensity-matched registry-based retrospective cohort study of patients with AMI complicated by cardiogenic shock undergoing PCI between October 1, 2015, and December 31, 2017, who were included in data from hospitals participating in the CathPCI and the Chest Pain-MI registries, both part of the American College of Cardiology's National Cardiovascular Data Registry. Patients receiving an intravascular microaxial LVAD were matched with those receiving IABP on demographics, clinical history, presentation, infarct location, coronary anatomy, and clinical laboratory data, with final follow-up through December 31, 2017. Exposures: Hemodynamic support, categorized as intravascular microaxial LVAD use only, IABP only, other (such as use of a percutaneous extracorporeal ventricular assist system, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or a combination of MCS device use), or medical therapy only. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and in-hospital major bleeding. Results: Among 28 304 patients undergoing PCI for AMI complicated by cardiogenic shock, the mean (SD) age was 65.0 (12.6) years, 67.0% were men, 81.3% had an ST-elevation myocardial infarction, and 43.3% had cardiac arrest. Over the study period among patients with AMI, an intravascular microaxial LVAD was used in 6.2% of patients, and IABP was used in 29.9%. Among 1680 propensity-matched pairs, there was a significantly higher risk of in-hospital death associated with use of an intravascular microaxial LVAD (45.0%) vs with an IABP (34.1% [absolute risk difference, 10.9 percentage points {95% CI, 7.6-14.2}; P < .001) and also higher risk of in-hospital major bleeding (intravascular microaxial LVAD [31.3%] vs IABP [16.0%]; absolute risk difference, 15.4 percentage points [95% CI, 12.5-18.2]; P < .001). These associations were consistent regardless of whether patients received a device before or after initiation of PCI. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients undergoing PCI for AMI complicated by cardiogenic shock from 2015 to 2017, use of an intravascular microaxial LVAD compared with IABP was associated with higher adjusted risk of in-hospital death and major bleeding complications, although study interpretation is limited by the observational design. Further research may be needed to understand optimal device choice for these patients.

Is Time From Last Hospitalization for Heart Failure to Placement of a Primary Prevention Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Associated With Patient Outcomes?

BACKGROUND: Landmark studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) in selected stable ambulatory patients with heart failure (HF) with a reduced ejection fraction receiving optimal medical therapy. It is not known whether a recent hospitalization for HF before ICD placement is associated with subsequent outcomes. METHODS: A post hoc analysis was performed of Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry's ICD Registry with a known diagnosis of HF and an ejection fraction ≤35% underdoing a new ICD placement for primary prevention. Patients were grouped based on the timing of ICD placement from the last hospitalization for HF. The association between timing of ICD placement and outcomes was assessed by using multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: The final analytic cohort included 81 180 patients undergoing initial ICD placement for primary prevention who were currently hospitalized for HF (n=11 563, 14%), hospitalized for HF within 3 months (n=6252, 8%), or hospitalized for HF >3 months previously or had no previous hospitalizations for HF (n=63 365, 78%). Patients currently or recently hospitalized for HF had a higher unadjusted composite periprocedural complication rate (2.60% versus 1.71% versus 1.25%, P<0.001). After adjusting for potential confounders, patients currently hospitalized for HF were at higher risk for death (odds ratio, 2.25; 95% CI, 2.02-2.52; P <0.001) and all-cause readmission (odds ratio, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.79-1.99; P <0.001) at 90 days. CONCLUSION: Older patients currently or recently hospitalized for HF undergoing initial ICD placement for primary prevention experienced a higher rate of periprocedural complications and were at increased risk of death in comparison with those receiving an ICD without recent HF hospitalization. Additional prospective, real-world, pragmatic, comparative effectiveness studies should be conducted to define the optimal timing of ICD placement.

Management of patients with diabetes and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: An international comparison.

AIMS: To compare the management of patients with diabetes and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in the United States and Asia to understand variations in treatment patterns across different healthcare systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our cohort included patients with diabetes and HFrEF (ejection fraction <40%) from a US-based registry of adults with diabetes (2013-2016, electronic health records) and a multi-national Asian registry of adults with heart failure (2010-2016, prospective registry). Asian countries were categorized as high income (HI) or low income (LI), according to the United Nations classification. Rates of use of guideline-directed medical therapies (determined through review of active medication lists) were compared across regions. RESULTS: Patients with diabetes and HFrEF in the United States (n = 28 877) were older, had higher body mass indices, and were more likely to have coronary disease than those in Asia (n = 2235). Compared with US patients, the use of guideline-directed medical therapy for HFrEF was lower in patients in LI Asian countries (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers: patients in the United States, 77% vs. patients in HI Asian countries, 76% vs patients in LI Asian countries, 69%; ß-blockers: patients in the United States, 91% vs. patients in HI Asian countries, 87% vs. patients in LI Asian countries, 69%; P < 0.001 for both). Insulin was used more commonly in the United States (44% vs. 24% vs. 25%, respectively; P < 0.001), whereas sulphonylureas were more often prescribed in Asian countries (42% vs. 52% vs. 54%; respectively, P < 0.001). Thiazolidinediones were prescribed in 6% of US patients compared with <1% of patients in Asia. The use of newer diabetes medications was <5% in all. CONCLUSION: In both the United States and Asia, opportunities for improvement in the use of evidence-based therapies exist for patients with both diabetes and HFrEF. Effective tools to guide medication choices for these complex, high-risk patients could have substantial impact on quality and outcomes.

Estimating Longitudinal Risks and Benefits From Cardiovascular Preventive Therapies Among Medicare Patients: The Million Hearts Longitudinal ASCVD Risk Assessment Tool: A Special Report From the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology.

The Million Hearts Initiative has a goal of preventing 1 million heart attacks and strokes-the leading causes of mortality-through several public health and healthcare strategies by 2017. The American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology support the program. The Cardiovascular Risk Reduction Model was developed by Million Hearts and the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services as a strategy to assess a value-based payment approach toward reduction in 10-year predicted risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) by implementing cardiovascular preventive strategies to manage the "ABCS" (aspirin therapy in appropriate patients, blood pressure control, cholesterol management, and smoking cessation). The purpose of this special report is to describe the development and intended use of the Million Hearts Longitudinal ASCVD Risk Assessment Tool. The Million Hearts Tool reinforces and builds on the "2013 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Assessment of Cardiovascular Risk" by allowing clinicians to estimate baseline and updated 10-year ASCVD risk estimates for primary prevention patients adhering to the appropriate ABCS over time, alone or in combination. The tool provides updated risk estimates based on evidence from high-quality systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the ABCS therapies. This novel approach to personalized estimation of benefits from risk-reducing therapies in primary prevention may help target therapies to those in whom they will provide the greatest benefit, and serves as the basis for a Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services program designed to evaluate the Million Hearts Cardiovascular Risk Reduction Model.

Enhancing the prediction of acute kidney injury risk after percutaneous coronary intervention using machine learning techniques: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The current acute kidney injury (AKI) risk prediction model for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) from the American College of Cardiology (ACC) National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) employed regression techniques. This study aimed to evaluate whether models using machine learning techniques could significantly improve AKI risk prediction after PCI. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used the same cohort and candidate variables used to develop the current NCDR CathPCI Registry AKI model, including 947,091 patients who underwent PCI procedures between June 1, 2009, and June 30, 2011. The mean age of these patients was 64.8 years, and 32.8% were women, with a total of 69,826 (7.4%) AKI events. We replicated the current AKI model as the baseline model and compared it with a series of new models. Temporal validation was performed using data from 970,869 patients undergoing PCIs between July 1, 2016, and March 31, 2017, with a mean age of 65.7 years; 31.9% were women, and 72,954 (7.5%) had AKI events. Each model was derived by implementing one of two strategies for preprocessing candidate variables (preselecting and transforming candidate variables or using all candidate variables in their original forms), one of three variable-selection methods (stepwise backward selection, lasso regularization, or permutation-based selection), and one of two methods to model the relationship between variables and outcome (logistic regression or gradient descent boosting). The cohort was divided into different training (70%) and test (30%) sets using 100 different random splits, and the performance of the models was evaluated internally in the test sets. The best model, according to the internal evaluation, was derived by using all available candidate variables in their original form, permutation-based variable selection, and gradient descent boosting. Compared with the baseline model that uses 11 variables, the best model used 13 variables and achieved a significantly better area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.752 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.749-0.754) versus 0.711 (95% CI 0.708-0.714), a significantly better Brier score of 0.0617 (95% CI 0.0615-0.0618) versus 0.0636 (95% CI 0.0634-0.0638), and a better calibration slope of observed versus predicted rate of 1.008 (95% CI 0.988-1.028) versus 1.036 (95% CI 1.015-1.056). The best model also had a significantly wider predictive range (25.3% versus 21.6%, p < 0.001) and was more accurate in stratifying AKI risk for patients. Evaluated on a more contemporary CathPCI cohort (July 1, 2015-March 31, 2017), the best model consistently achieved significantly better performance than the baseline model in AUC (0.785 versus 0.753), Brier score (0.0610 versus 0.0627), calibration slope (1.003 versus 1.062), and predictive range (29.4% versus 26.2%). The current study does not address implementation for risk calculation at the point of care, and potential challenges include the availability and accessibility of the predictors. CONCLUSIONS: Machine learning techniques and data-driven approaches resulted in improved prediction of AKI risk after PCI. The results support the potential of these techniques for improving risk prediction models and identification of patients who may benefit from risk-mitigation strategies.

Prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension in China: data from 1·7 million adults in a population-based screening study (China PEACE Million Persons Project).

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is common in China and its prevalence is rising, yet it remains inadequately controlled. Few studies have the capacity to characterise the epidemiology and management of hypertension across many heterogeneous subgroups. We did a study of the prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension in China and assessed their variations across many subpopulations. METHODS: We made use of data generated in the China Patient-Centered Evaluative Assessment of Cardiac Events (PEACE) Million Persons Project from Sept 15, 2014, to June 20, 2017, a population-based screening project that enrolled around 1·7 million community-dwelling adults aged 35-75 years from all 31 provinces in mainland China. In this population, we defined hypertension as systolic blood pressure of at least 140 mm Hg, or diastolic blood pressure of at least 90 mm Hg, or self-reported antihypertensive medication use in the previous 2 weeks. Hypertension awareness, treatment, and control were defined, respectively, among hypertensive adults as a self-reported diagnosis of hypertension, current use of antihypertensive medication, and blood pressure of less than 140/90 mm Hg. We assessed awareness, treatment, and control in 264 475 population subgroups-defined a priori by all possible combinations of 11 demographic and clinical factors (age [35-44, 45-54, 55-64, and 65-75 years], sex [men and women], geographical region [western, central, and eastern China], urbanity [urban vs rural], ethnic origin [Han and non-Han], occupation [farmer and non-farmer], annual household income [< ¥10 000, ¥10 000-50 000, and ≥¥50 000], education [primary school and below, middle school, high school, and college and above], previous cardiovascular events [yes or no], current smoker [yes or no], and diabetes [yes or no]), and their associations with individual and primary health-care site characteristics, using mixed models. FINDINGS: The sample contained 1 738 886 participants with a mean age of 55·6 years (SD 9·7), 59·5% of whom were women. 44·7% (95% CI 44·6-44·8) of the sample had hypertension, of whom 44·7% (44·6-44·8) were aware of their diagnosis, 30·1% (30·0-30·2) were taking prescribed antihypertensive medications, and 7·2% (7·1-7·2) had achieved control. The age-standardised and sex-standardised rates of hypertension prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control were 37·2% (37·1-37·3), 36·0% (35·8-36·2), 22·9% (22·7-23·0), and 5·7% (5·6-5·7), respectively. The most commonly used medication class was calcium-channel blockers (55·2%, 55·0-55·4). Among individuals whose hypertension was treated but not controlled, 81·5% (81·3-81·6) were using only one medication. The proportion of participants who were aware of their hypertension and were receiving treatment varied significantly across subpopulations; lower likelihoods of awareness and treatment were associated with male sex, younger age, lower income, and an absence of previous cardiovascular events, diabetes, obesity, or alcohol use (all p<0·01). By contrast, control rate was universally low across all subgroups (<30·0%). INTERPRETATION: Among Chinese adults aged 35-75 years, nearly half have hypertension, fewer than a third are being treated, and fewer than one in twelve are in control of their blood pressure. The low number of people in control is ubiquitous in all subgroups of the Chinese population and warrants broad-based, global strategy, such as greater efforts in prevention, as well as better screening and more effective and affordable treatment. FUNDING: Ministry of Finance and National Health and Family Planning Commission, China.

Availability, cost, and prescription patterns of antihypertensive medications in primary health care in China: a nationwide cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Around 200 million adults in China have hypertension, but few are treated or achieve adequate control of their blood pressure. Available and affordable medications are important for successfully controlling hypertension, but little is known about current patterns of access to, and use of, antihypertensive medications in Chinese primary health care. METHODS: We used data from a nationwide cross-sectional survey (the China Patient-Centered Evaluative Assessment of Cardiac Events Million Persons Project primary health care survey), which was undertaken between November, 2016 and May, 2017, to assess the availability, cost, and prescription patterns of 62 antihypertensive medications at primary health-care sites across 31 Chinese provinces. We surveyed 203 community health centres, 401 community health stations, 284 township health centres, and 2474 village clinics to assess variation in availability, cost, and prescription by economic region and type of site. We also assessed the use of high-value medications, defined as guideline-recommended and low-cost. We also examined the association of medication cost with availability and prescription patterns. FINDINGS: Our study sample included 3362 primary health-care sites and around 1 million people (613 638 people at 2758 rural sites and 478 393 people at 604 urban sites). Of the 3362 sites, 8·1% (95% CI 7·2-9·1) stocked no antihypertensive medications and 33·8% (32·2-35·4) stocked all four classes that were routinely used. Village clinics and sites in the western region of China had the lowest availability. Only 32·7% (32·2-33·3) of all sites stocked high-value medications, and few high-value medications were prescribed (11·2% [10·9-11·6] of all prescription records). High-cost medications were more likely to be prescribed than low-cost alternatives. INTERPRETATION: China has marked deficiencies in the availability, cost, and prescription of antihypertensive medications. High-value medications are not preferentially used. Future efforts to reduce the burden of hypertension, particularly through the work of primary health-care providers, will need to improve access to, and use of, antihypertensive medications, paying particular attention to those with high value. FUNDING: CAMS Innovation Fund for Medical Science, the Entrusted Project from the China National Development and Reform Commission, and the Major Public Health Service Project from the Ministry of Finance of China and National Health and Family Planning Commission of China.

Patterns of glucose-lowering medication use in patients with type 2 diabetes and heart failure. Insights from the Diabetes Collaborative Registry (DCR).

BACKGROUND: Optimal glucose-lowering strategies in patients with both heart failure (HF) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) are not well defined, particularly as novel medication classes emerge.We sought to evaluate current patterns of glucose-lowering medication use in adults with T2D with and without HF. METHODS: The DCR is a US-based outpatient registry of adults with diabetes; currently includes 3074 providers in 203 practices. We used hierarchical, modified Poisson regression models to examine the relationship between concomitant HF with use of each glucose-lowering medication class, adjusting for other factors that could impact selection of one medication class over another: age, chronic kidney disease (CKD), coronary artery disease (CAD), number of glucose-lowering medications, and insurance. RESULTS: Among 456,106 adults with T2D, 125,161 (27%) had a diagnosis of HF (30% HFrEF, 15%HFmrEF, 55% HFpEF). Patients with T2D and HF were more likely to be older and male, and to have CAD, atrial fibrillation, and CKD. In the multivariable models, HF was associated with a greater use of insulin (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.36-1.42) and lower use of thiazolidinediones (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.74-0.83), SGLT2 inhibitors (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.79-0.89), and metformin (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.82-0.86). Among the subgroup of patients with HF, thiazolidinediones, GLP-1 receptor agonists, and SGLT2 inhibitors were used even less often in patients with lower ejection fraction, indicating that both the diagnosis of clinical HF and ejection fraction may influence the choice of glucose-lowering medications. CONCLUSION: In a large US-based outpatient registry, we found that a quarter of adults with T2D had a diagnosis of HF, which was predominantly HFpEF. Although certain T2D medication use in patients with HF appeared consistent with evidence (less use of thiazolidinediones), others appeared contrary to evidence (less use of metformin and SGLT2 inhibitors).

Quantifying the utilization of medical devices necessary to detect postmarket safety differences: A case study of implantable cardioverter defibrillators.

PURPOSE: To estimate medical device utilization needed to detect safety differences among implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) generator models and compare these estimates to utilization in practice. METHODS: We conducted repeated sample size estimates to calculate the medical device utilization needed, systematically varying device-specific safety event rate ratios and significance levels while maintaining 80% power, testing 3 average adverse event rates (3.9, 6.1, and 12.6 events per 100 person-years) estimated from the American College of Cardiology's 2006 to 2010 National Cardiovascular Data Registry of ICDs. We then compared with actual medical device utilization. RESULTS: At significance level 0.05 and 80% power, 34% or fewer ICD models accrued sufficient utilization in practice to detect safety differences for rate ratios <1.15 and an average event rate of 12.6 events per 100 person-years. For average event rates of 3.9 and 12.6 events per 100 person-years, 30% and 50% of ICD models, respectively, accrued sufficient utilization for a rate ratio of 1.25, whereas 52% and 67% for a rate ratio of 1.50. Because actual ICD utilization was not uniformly distributed across ICD models, the proportion of individuals receiving any ICD that accrued sufficient utilization in practice was 0% to 21%, 32% to 70%, and 67% to 84% for rate ratios of 1.05, 1.15, and 1.25, respectively, for the range of 3 average adverse event rates. CONCLUSIONS: Small safety differences among ICD generator models are unlikely to be detected through routine surveillance given current ICD utilization in practice, but large safety differences can be detected for most patients at anticipated average adverse event rates.

Age Differences in Hospital Mortality for Acute Myocardial Infarction: Implications for Hospital Profiling.

BACKGROUND: Publicly reported hospital risk-standardized mortality rates (RSMRs) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are calculated for Medicare beneficiaries. Outcomes for older patients with AMI may not reflect general outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between hospital 30-day RSMRs for older patients (aged ≥65 years) and those for younger patients (aged 18 to 64 years) and all patients (aged ≥18 years) with AMI. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: 986 hospitals in the ACTION (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network) Registry-Get With the Guidelines. PARTICIPANTS: Adults hospitalized for AMI from 1 October 2010 to 30 September 2014. MEASUREMENTS: Hospital 30-day RSMRs were calculated for older, younger, and all patients using an electronic health record measure of AMI mortality endorsed by the National Quality Forum. Hospitals were ranked by their 30-day RSMRs for these 3 age groups, and agreement in rankings was plotted. The correlation in hospital AMI achievement scores for each age group was also calculated using the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (HVBP) Program method computed with the electronic health record measure. RESULTS: 267 763 and 276 031 AMI hospitalizations among older and younger patients, respectively, were identified. Median hospital 30-day RSMRs were 9.4%, 3.0%, and 6.2% for older, younger, and all patients, respectively. Most top- and bottom-performing hospitals for older patients were neither top nor bottom performers for younger patients. In contrast, most top and bottom performers for older patients were also top and bottom performers for all patients. Similarly, HVBP achievement scores for older patients correlated weakly with those for younger patients (R = 0.30) and strongly with those for all patients (R = 0.92). LIMITATION: Minority of U.S. hospitals. CONCLUSION: Hospital mortality rankings for older patients with AMI inconsistently reflect rankings for younger patients. Incorporation of younger patients into assessment of hospital outcomes would permit further examination of the presence and effect of age-related quality differences. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: American College of Cardiology.

Practitioner Gender and Quality of Care in Ambulatory Cardiology Practices: A Report From the National Cardiovascular Data Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence (PINNACLE) Registry.

BACKGROUND: Some studies suggest that female practitioners are more likely to provide guideline-concordant care than male practitioners; however, little is known about the role of practitioner gender in cardiology. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to measure the association between practitioner gender and adherence to the cardiovascular performance measures in the American College of Cardiology's ambulatory Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence Registry. METHODS: Patients with at least 1 outpatient visit with a unique practitioner were included. Among eligible patients, adherence to 7 guideline-supported performance measures for coronary artery disease, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation over 12 months after registry entry was compared by practitioner gender using hierarchical models adjusting for practitioner type (physicians vs advance practice practitioners) and number of visits. RESULTS: The study cohort included 1493 individual practitioners who saw 769 139 patients; 80% of practitioners were men. Male practitioners were more often physicians compared with female practitioners (98.2% vs 43.7%, P < .01). Accounting for practitioner category and visit frequency, guideline adherence rates were similar by practitioner gender for all measures with the exception of marginally higher rates for coronary artery disease performance measures for male practitioners compared with female practitioners (antiplatelet: rate ratio [RR] = 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.09; ß-blockers: RR = 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.10; and lipid-lowering drug: RR = 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04-1.10) and atrial fibrillation (oral anticoagulants: RR = 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.09). CONCLUSION: Male practitioners marginally outperformed their female counterparts in ambulatory practices enrolled in a voluntary cardiovascular performance improvement registry program. Overall low adherence to some performance measures suggests room for improvement among all practitioners.