Mechanical circulatory support in acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock: Challenges and importance of randomized control trials.

BACKGROUND: Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. METHODS: We provide an overview of previously conducted studies on the use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices in the treatment of AMI-CS and difficulties which may be encountered in conducting such trials in the United States. RESULTS: Well powered randomized control trials are difficult to conduct in a critically ill patient population due to physician preferences, perceived lack of equipoise and challenges obtaining informed consent. CONCLUSIONS: With growth in utilization of MCS devices in patients with AMI-CS, efforts to perform well-powered, randomized control trials must be undertaken.

Feasibility and safety of orbital atherectomy for the treatment of in-stent restenosis secondary to stent under-expansion.

BACKGROUND: Debulking and ablative techniques are sometimes used for the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) secondary to resistant stent under-expansion (SU). The safety and effectiveness of orbital atherectomy (OA) in this cohort of patients has not been reported. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated consecutive patients treated with OA for ISR secondary to balloon undilatable SU at two academic tertiary care centers between October 2016 and June 2019. Angiographic or intravascular imaging identified SU. Technical success was defined as residual 0% stenosis with TIMI III flow. RESULTS: A total of 41 patients were included in the study. Patients had an average age of 65 ± 12 years; 73% male, 61% diabetic, 41% with prior coronary artery bypass grafting, 61% with a prior incident of ISR, 51% presented with stable angina, 17% unstable angina, and 32% non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (MI). Implantation of the under-expanded stents occurred between 2 months and 22 years prior to the index procedure. A total of 27% of patients had multiple layers of stents in the target lesion and 32% of patients had in-stent chronic total occlusion. Technical success was achieved in 40 (98%) patients. There were 2 (5%) major adverse cardiovascular events; both of them were periprocedural MI from the no-reflow phenomenon. There were 2 (5%) Ellis type II coronary perforations that required no intervention. CONCLUSIONS: OA can be effectively performed as an adjunctive tool in the treatment of ISR with balloon undilatable SU. The use of OA for SU is not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and is "off label" and caution must be used to limit any device/stent interaction.

Improved Outcomes Associated with the use of Shock Protocols: Updates from the National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative.

BACKGROUND: The National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative is a single-arm, prospective, multicenter study to assess outcomes associated with early mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock (AMICS) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: Between July 2016 and February 2019, 35 sites participated and enrolled into the study. All centers agreed to treat patients with AMICS using a standard protocol emphasizing invasive hemodynamic monitoring and rapid initiation of MCS. Inclusion and exclusion criteria mimicked those of the "SHOCK" trial with an additional exclusion criteria of intra-aortic balloon pump counter-pulsation prior to MCS. RESULTS: A total of 171 consecutive patients were enrolled. Patients had an average age of 63 years, 77% were male, and 68% were admitted with AMICS. About 83% of patients were on vasopressors or inotropes, 20% had a witnessed out of hospital cardiac arrest, 29% had in-hospital cardiac arrest, and 10% were under active cardiopulmonary resuscitation during MCS implantation. In accordance with the protocol, 74% of patients had MCS implanted prior to PCI. Right heart catheterization was performed in 92%. About 78% of patients presented with ST-elevation myocardial infarction with average door to support times of 85 ± 63 min and door to balloon times of 87 ± 58 min. Survival to discharge was 72%. Creatinine ≥2, lactate >4, cardiac power output (CPO) <0.6 W, and age ≥ 70 years were predictors of mortality. Lactate and CPO measurements at 12-24 hr reliably predicted overall mortality postindex procedure. CONCLUSION: In contemporary practice, use of a shock protocol emphasizing best practices is associated with improved outcomes.

Feasibility of early mechanical circulatory support in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: The Detroit cardiogenic shock initiative.

OBJECTIVE: The 'Detroit Cardiogenic Shock Initiative' is a single-arm, multicenter study to assess the feasibility of early mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients who present with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMICS) who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: Between July 2016 and February 2017, 4 metro Detroit sites participated in the study. The centers agreed to treat patients with AMICS using a mutually agreed-upon protocol emphasizing invasive hemodynamic monitoring and rapid initiation of MCS. Inclusion and exclusion criteria mimicked those from the 'SHOCK' trial with an additional exclusion criteria being use of intra-aortic balloon pump counter pulsation prior to MCS. RESULTS: A total of 41 consecutive patients were included. Patients had an average age of 65 ± 14 years, 71% were male and 59% of patients were admitted to the hospital in cardiogenic shock. Prior to receiving MCS, 93% of patients were on vasopressors or inotropes, 15% of patients had a witnessed out of hospital cardiac arrest, 27% of patients had an in-hospital cardiac arrest, and 17% were under active cardiopulmonary resuscitation while MCS was being implanted. In accordance to the protocol recommendation, 66% of patients had a MCS device inserted prior to PCI. Right heart catheterization and hemodynamic monitoring was performed in 83% of patients. Door to support times averaged 83 ± 58 minutes and 71% of patients were able to reduce the levels of inotropes and vasopressors within the first 24-hours of their index procedure. Pre-procedure cardiac power output (CPO) was 0.57 W and post-procedure CPO was 0.95 W, a 67% increase (p < 0.001). Survival to explant for the entire cohort was 85% a significant improvement from institutional historical controls (85% vs 51% p < 0.001) and survival to discharge was 76%. CONCLUSION: Centers who adopted a regional shock protocol emphasizing the delivery of early MCS with invasive hemodynamic monitoring can achieve rapid door to support times and can improve survival in patients who present with AMICS. Larger national studies will be needed to further validate this pilot feasibility study.

The comparative safety and effectiveness of bivalirudin versus heparin monotherapy in patients on dialysis undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan cardiovascular consortium.

BACKGROUND: Dialysis patients are at a higher risk of bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); however, due to their exclusion from randomized clinical trials, the optimal antithrombotic regimen for this population remains unknown. We sought to evaluate the comparative safety and effectiveness of bivalirudin monotherapy versus unfractionated heparin (UFH) monotherapy in dialysis patients undergoing PCI. METHODS: We included dialysis patients who underwent PCI in a multicenter registry between January 2010 and September 2015 at 47 Michigan hospitals. We compared in-hospital outcomes between bivalirudin versus UFH; excluding those treated with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors. Optimal full matching was used to account for the nonrandom use of these drugs. RESULTS: Of 177,963 patients who underwent PCI, 4,303 (2.4%) were on dialysis. Among those, 1,257 (29.2%) received bivalirudin monotherapy and 2,112 (49.1%) received UFH monotherapy. Patients treated with bivalirudin had fewer comorbidities. After matching, there were no significant differences in outcomes between those who received bivalirudin versus UFH: bleeding (adjusted odds ratio: 0.67; 95% confidence interval: 0.41-1.07; P = 0.093); major bleeding (0.81; 0.19-3.50; P = 0.77); transfusion (1.01; 0.77-1.33; P = 0.96); repeat PCI (0.57; 0.14-2.24; P = 0.42); stent thrombosis (0.56; 0.05-5.83; P = 0.63); and death (0.84; 0.46-1.51; P = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: We found no significant differences in in-hospital outcomes between bivalirudin and UFH monotherapy among dialysis patients undergoing PCI. Randomized clinical trials are needed to determine the optimal anticoagulant regimen for this population. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Coronary artery perforations after contemporary percutaneous coronary interventions: Evaluation of incidence, risk factors, outcomes, and predictors of mortality.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the incidence, risk factors, in-hospital, and long-term outcomes and predictors of mortality of coronary artery perforations (CAP) in the contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) era. BACKGROUND: CAP is a rare but serious complication of PCI associated with increased risk of morbidity and mortality. METHODS: We included 181,590 procedures performed across 47 hospitals in Michigan from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2015. Endpoints evaluated included the incidence of CAP and its association with in-hospital outcomes. Logistic regression analysis was utilized to determine independent risk factors for CAP and to examine whether the effect of CAP on mortality varied by gender. RESULTS: CAP occurred in 625 (0.34%) patients. Independent predictors for CAP included older age, peripheral arterial disease, presence of left ventricular dysfunction or cardiomyopathy, lower body mass index, pre-PCI insertion of a mechanical ventricular support device, treatment of complex lesions (Type C), and treatment of chronic total occlusions, the latter of which was the strongest predictor of perforation (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 7.01, P < 0.001). After adjusting for baseline risk, the incidence of adverse outcomes remained substantially greater in patients with a perforation, with an adjusted OR estimate of 5.00 for mortality (95% CI 3.42-7.31), 3.25 for acute kidney injury (95% CI 2.30-4.58), and 5.26 for transfusion (95% CI 4.03-6.87) (all P < 0.001). Perforation was associated with a higher mortality in women than men (interaction P value = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: CAP is a rare complication but is associated with high morbidity and mortality especially in women. Further investigation is warranted to determine why women fare worse after CAP. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The comparative safety of abciximab versus eptifibatide in patients on dialysis undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Cardiovascular Consortium (BMC2).

OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the patterns of use and outcomes associated with eptifibatide and abciximab administration among dialysis patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND: Contraindicated medications are frequently administered to dialysis patients undergoing PCI often resulting in adverse outcomes. Eptifibatide is a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor that is often used during PCI and is contraindicated in dialysis. METHODS: We included dialysis patients who underwent PCI from January 2010 to September 2015 at 47 hospitals in Michigan. We compared outcomes between patients who received eptifibatide compared with abciximab. Both groups required concurrent treatment with unfractionated heparin only. In-hospital outcomes included repeat PCI, bleeding, major bleeding, need for transfusion, and death. Optimal full matching was used to adjust for non-random drug administration. RESULTS: Of 177 963 patients who underwent PCI, 4303 (2.4%) were on dialysis. Among those, 384 (8.9%) received eptifibatide and 100 (2.3%) received abciximab. Prior to matching, patients who received eptifibatide had higher pre-procedural hemoglobin levels (11.3 g/dL vs. 10.7 g/dL; P < 0.001) and less frequently had a history of myocardial infarction (36.5% vs. 52.0%; P = 0.005). After matching, there were no significant differences in in-hospital outcomes between eptifibatide and abciximab including transfusion (aOR: 1.15; 95%CI: 0.55-2.40; P = 0.70), bleeding (1.47; 0.64-3.40; P = 0.36), major bleeding (4.68; 0.42-52.3; P = 0.21), repeat PCI (0.38; 0.03-4.23; P = 0.43), and death (1.53; 0.2-9.05; P = 0.64). CONCLUSIONS: Despite being contraindicated in dialysis, eptifibatide was used approximately 3.5 times more frequently than abciximab among dialysis patients undergoing PCI but was associated with similar in-hospital outcomes.

The comparative efficacy of bivalirudin is markedly attenuated by use of radial access: insights from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Cardiovascular Consortium.

AIM: The purpose of our study was to evaluate the relative impact of bivalirudin on bleeding outcomes associated with trans-radial interventions (TRI) in real world practice. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between January 2010 and March 2014 at the 47 hospitals participating in the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Cardiovascular Consortium (BMC2) were utilized. Propensity matching was used within cohorts defined by access site. The impact of bivalirudin use on in-hospital outcomes was evaluated with Fisher's exact tests. Among patients undergoing trans-femoral interventions (TFI), use of bivalirudin was associated with a reduction in bleeding compared with both glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI; 1.67 vs. 3.46%, absolute risk reduction (ARR) 1.79%, odds ratio, OR, 0.47, confidence interval, CI, 0.41-0.54, number needed to treat, NNT 56, P < 0.001) and heparin (1.26 vs. 1.76%, ARR 0.5%, OR 0.71, CI 0.61-0.82, NNT 197, P < 0.001). Among patients undergoing TRI, there was a more modest absolute reduction in bleeding with bivalirudin compared with GPI (0.79 vs. 1.41%, ARR 0.62%, OR 0.56, CI 0.34-0.90, NNT 161, P = 0.016) and no difference in bleeding compared with heparin (0.46 vs. 0.46%, OR 1, CI 0.54-1.84, P = 1). CONCLUSION: Bivalirudin is markedly efficacious in reducing bleeding in patients undergoing TFI. The reduction in bleeding associated with bivalirudin use is minimal to absent in patients undergoing TRI. Given its lower cost and comparable outcomes, heparin should be the preferred anticoagulation strategy in those undergoing radial PCI.

Achieving Equitable Cardiovascular Care for All: ACC Board of Trustees Health Equity Task Force Action Plan.

Advancements in cardiovascular (CV) disease management are notable, yet health inequities prevail, associated with increased morbidity and mortality noted among non-Hispanic African Americans in the United States. The 2002 Institute of Medicine Report revealed ongoing racial and ethnic health care disparities, spearheading a deeper understanding of the social determinants of health and systemic racism to develop strategies for CV health equity (HE). This article outlines the strategic HE approach of the American College of Cardiology, comprising 6 strategic equity domains: workforce pathway inclusivity, health care, data, science, and tools; education and training; membership, partnership, and collaboration; advocacy and policy; and clinical trial diversity. The American College of Cardiology's Health Equity Task Force champions the improvement of patients' lived experiences, population health, and clinician well-being while reducing health care costs-the Quadruple Aim of Health Equity. Thus, we examine multifaceted HE interventions and provide evidence for scalable real-world interventions to promote equitable CV care.

Feasibility and Outcomes of a Cardiovascular Medicine Inclusive Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) Service.

Background: There has been a significant increase in the utilization of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) in recent years. Cardiothoracic surgery teams have historically led VA-ECMO care teams, with little data available on alternative care models. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of a cardiovascular medicine inclusive VA-ECMO service, analyzing patients treated with peripheral VA-ECMO at a large quaternary care center from 2018 to 2022. The primary outcome was death while on VA-ECMO or within 24 hours of decannulation. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify predictors of the primary outcome. Results: Two hundred forty-four patients were included in the analysis (median age 61 years; 28.7% female), of whom 91.8% were cannulated by interventional cardiologists, and 84.4% were managed by a cardiology service comprised of interventional cardiologists, cardiac intensivists or advanced heart failure cardiologists. Indications for VA-ECMO included acute myocardial infarction (34.8%), decompensated heart failure (30.3%), and refractory cardiac arrest (10.2%). VA-ECMO was utilized during cardiopulmonary resuscitation in 26.6% of cases, 48% of which were peri-procedural arrest. Of the patients, 46% survived to decannulation, the majority of whom were decannulated percutaneously in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. There was no difference in survival following cannulation by a cardiac surgeon vs interventional cardiologist (50% vs 45%; P = .90). Complications included arterial injury (3.7%), compartment syndrome (4.1%), cannulation site infection (1.2%), stroke (14.8%), acute kidney injury (52.5%), access site bleeding (16%) and need for blood transfusion (83.2%). Elevated baseline lactate (odds ratio [OR], 1.13 per unit increase) and sequential organ failure assessment score (OR, 1.27 per unit increase) were independently associated with the primary outcome. Conversely, an elevated baseline survival after VA ECMO score (OR, 0.92 per unit increase) and 8-hour serum lactate clearance (OR, 0.98 per % increase) were independently associated with survival. Conclusions: The use of a cardiovascular medicine inclusive ECMO service is feasible and may be practical in select centers as indications for VA-ECMO expand.

Comparative evaluation of postoperative pain and periapical healing after root canal treatment using three different base endodontic sealers - A randomized control clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to evaluate and compare the postoperative pain and periapical healing after root canal treatment using three different base endodontic sealers. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Primary root canal treatment was initiated in 63 patients diagnosed with necrotic pulp and apical periodontitis, cleaning and shaping was completed in two visit and different base endodontic sealers were used for obturation were selected based on the random allocation of the participants to the following groups; Tubli-Seal, AH Plus and BioRoot RCS. Postoperative pain was recorded by using 100 mm visual analog scale at 24 h, 48 h, 72 h and 7 d after obturation. Digital periapical radiographic evaluation was done to assess rate of periapical healing at baseline, 1, 3 and 6 months. Statistical analysis was done using Kruskal Wallis test and one-way ANOVA. RESULTS: The mean difference in the size of periapical lesions for Tubli-Seal (6.27, 13.41), AH Plus (3.86, 9.80) and BioRoot RCS (4.05, 10.22) at 3 months and 6 months respectively. The mean pain scores at 24 h for Tubli-Seal (17.94 ± 11.35), AH Plus (11.57 ± 11.18), BioRoot RCS (4.73 ± 7.72). At 48 h, Tubli-Seal (5.26 ± 9.04), AH Plus (1.57 ± 3.74) and BioRoot RCS (1.57 ± 3.74) respectively. The mean pain score at 72 h for Tubli-Seal was 2.63 ± 7.33 whereas none of the patients had reported pain in AH Plus and BioRoot RCS group. None of the patients had pain after 7 d of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: BioRoot RCS showed less postoperative pain compared to AH Plus and Tubli-Seal and showed better periapical healing compared to AH Plus and Tubli-Seal at 3 and 6 months intervals respectively. Key words:BioRoot RCS, root canal obturation, root canal sealers, periapical periodontitis, Periapical healing, postoperative pain.

Analgesic efficacy of corticosteroids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs through oral route in the reduction of postendodontic pain: A systematic review.

Analgesic medications in dentistry are indicated for the relief of acute pain, postoperative pain, chronic pain as well as controlling adjunctive intraoperative pain. The use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) has shown an effective reduction of postendodontic pain by action on the cyclooxygenase pathway. Another medication which is used recently is corticosteroid which enables the reduction of pain. They are hormones secreted from the adrenal gland and have strong anti-inflammatory actions. This review aims to compare the analgesic efficacy of NSAIDs and corticosteroids when administered through oral route for reducing postendodontic pain. The secondary objective was to assess the anesthetic effect of the nerve block when an oral premedication of NSAIDs or corticosteroids was administered. The databases of PubMed, ScienceDirect, LILACS, and Cochrane were searched for related topics from 1983 to April 2020. Bibliographies of clinical studies were identified in the electronic search. Clinical studies with postendodontic pain reduction using NSAIDs and corticosteroids were selected. Clinical studies that met all inclusion criteria were reviewed. Data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers. All individuals who administered single dose analgesic (NSAID or corticosteroid) before initiating root canal treatment were taken into inclusion criteria. All the relevant data were extracted from the selected studies were reviewed by two independent reviewers using a standardized data collection form, and in case of disagreement, a third reviewer was enquired to achieve a consensus. Risk of bias of the selected studies was done using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (version 1). Mean pain score levels at various time intervals showed an increased analgesic success rate for corticosteroids ( 32-1) in comparison to NSAIDs ( 32-21.4). Anesthetic effect of the nerve block administered was seen to be better when an oral premedication of corticosteroids (38.2%-80.8%) was given in comparison to NSAID (25.5%-73.1%). From the present study, it can be concluded that oral administration of corticosteroids provides a better analgesic efficacy when compared to NSAIDs as an oral premedication for postoperative pain reduction. It can also be concluded that corticosteroids when used as an oral premedication provide a better anesthetic effect of the nerve block administered when compared to NSAIDs given as an oral premedication. These findings could help the clinician determine which pretreatment analgesic would have a better effect in reduction of pain posttreatment as well as increasing the anesthetic efficacy of administered block. Systematic Review Registration Number: CRD42021235394.

Periapical Healing following Root Canal Treatment Using Different Endodontic Sealers: A Systematic Review.

The healing of the periapical tissues is crucial to the success of root canal treatment. The review studies effectively examine various endodontic root canal sealants in terms of periapical healing. This systematic review was formulated following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines and registered in the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) number-CRD42021239192. To find relevant articles, PubMed Central and Medline databases (until February 2022) were searched. Studies that evaluated healing following the application of different endodontic sealers were analysed. A primary outcome measure was the resolution of periapical lesions following the endodontic treatment. In vivo studies comparing radiographic treatment outcomes and articles with a minimum of 6-month follow-up were included. A total of 9 clinical trial studies that met all the inclusion criteria were included in the analysis. The overall risk of bias was high in four studies out of nine studies. Periapical lesions showed significant healing after endodontic treatment regardless of sealer type, although bioceramic and bioactive sealers had shown better results.

Qualitative Assessment of the Surface Topographic Changes of XP-endo Shaper and TruNatomy files after exposure to Sodium Hypochlorite and Ethylenediaminetetraacetic Acid.

OBJECTIVE: TruNatomy and XP-endo Shaper are recently introduced file systems showing increased fatigue resistance rate. The present study aims to evaluate the surface topographic changes and nickel (Ni) and titanium (Ti) elemental loss of XP-endo Shaper (XPS) and TruNatomy (TN) files on exposure to conventionally used root canal irrigants; [5.25% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) and 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA)] at a 10 minute time frame using atomic force microscopy (AFM) and energy dispersion X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) analytical techniques. METHODS: Twelve samples for each of XPS (30/.04 taper) and TN (26/.04 taper; prime) instruments were dynamically exposed to 5.25% NaOCl, 17% EDTA separately for 10 minutes and in combination of 5.25% NaOCl (8 minutes)+17% EDTA (2 minutes) for a total of 10 minutes. Post exposure, the files were subjugated to AFM and EDX analysis. Independent t test and one-way ANOVA were used for statistical analysis, and the level of significance was set at 0.05. RESULTS: XPS and TN showed a significant increase of surface roughness (Ra) and roughness mean square (RMS) on exposure to various irrigants (P<0.05) using AFM analysis. Increased overall roughness was observed with TN in comparison to XPS (P<0.05). Elements Ni and Ti loss was found in both XPS and TN files using EDX analysis. Both files exhibited Ni and Ti loss with the loss of Ni content higher for TN after exposure to 17% EDTA. Loss of Ti was seen for both files on exposure to a combination of 5.25% NaOCl+17% EDTA. CONCLUSION: After exposure to root canal irrigants, the surface roughness was lesser in XPS compared to TN files. 17% EDTA caused significantly higher surface roughness in both file systems when compared to 5.25% NaOCl. TN exhibited overall higher elemental (Ni and Ti) loss on exposure to 17% EDTA and 5.25% NaOCl+17% EDTA in comparison to XPS files.

Management of STEMI during the COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons learned in 2020 to prepare for 2021.

As the prevalence of asymptomatic COVID-19 continues to increase, there is an increasing possibility that patients with COVID-19 may presen with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). With social distancing and restricted access to preventive healthcare and emergency services, the management of acute cardiac emergencies such as myocardial infarction has suffered collateral damage. Thus far, global trends suggest a decrease in STEMI activations with possible worse outcomes due to delayed presentation and management. In this review, we discuss the challenges to STEMI management in the COVID-19 era and provide potential solutions for adherence to evidence-based therapies as the pandemic progresses into the year 2021.

Racial, Ethnic, and Sex Disparities in Patients With STEMI and Cardiogenic Shock.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the combined impact of race, ethnicity, and sex on in-hospital outcomes using data from the National Inpatient Sample. BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a major cause of mortality following ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Early revascularization reduces mortality in such patients. Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices are increasingly used to hemodynamically support patients during revascularization. Little is known about racial, ethnic, and sex disparities in patients with STEMI and CS. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample was queried from January 2006 to September 2015 for hospitalizations with STEMI and CS. The associations between sex, race, ethnicity, and outcomes were examined using complex-samples multivariate logistic or generalized linear model regressions. RESULTS: Of 159,339 patients with STEMI and CS, 57,839 (36.3%) were women. In-hospital mortality was higher for all women (range 40% to 45.4%) compared with men (range 30.4% to 34.7%). Women (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06 to 1.16; p < 0.001) as well as Black (aOR: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.34; p = 0.011) and Hispanic (aOR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.06 to 1.33; p = 0.003) men had higher odds of in-hospital mortality compared with White men, with Hispanic women having the highest odds of in-hospital mortality (aOR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.26 to 1.70; p < 0.001). Women were older (age: 69.8 years vs. 63.2 years), had more comorbidities, and underwent fewer invasive cardiac procedures, including revascularization, right heart catheterization, and MCS. CONCLUSIONS: There are significant racial, ethnic, and sex differences in procedural utilization and clinical outcomes in patients with STEMI and CS. Women are less likely to undergo invasive cardiac procedures, including revascularization and MCS. Women as well as Black and Hispanic patients have a higher likelihood of death compared with White men.

Healthcare utilization and emotional distress in coronary artery disease patients.

BACKGROUND: No studies to-date have examined the various types of emotional distress (ED) for their relative power at predicting costs in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). OBJECTIVE: The authors investigated the association between expenditure for CAD patients and various measures of emotional/psychological functioning. METHOD: The authors assessed dollars spent in relation to dimensions of the Symptom Checklist 90-Revised and traditional risk factors in the year preceding referral of 164 CAD patients for stress management. RESULTS: Total costs were associated with the Anxiety, Phobic Anxiety, and Psychoticism scales. Hypertension was also associated with increased costs. CONCLUSIONS: Present results indicate an association of higher costs with anxiety. Because the symptoms of anxiety overlap with those of cardiac disease, increased vigilance by both patients and practitioners, resulting in more testing and longer hospital stays is not surprising. Results suggest that there is a potential for substantial cost savings with enhanced detection and treatment of anxiety-spectrum emotional distress.

Multivessel Versus Culprit-Only Revascularization in STEMI and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to provide a comprehensive evaluation of contemporary randomized trials addressing the efficacy and safety of multivessel versus culprit vessel-only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) among patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease. BACKGROUND: Multivessel coronary artery disease is present in about one-half of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Randomized controlled trials comparing multivessel and culprit vessel-only PCI produced conflicting results regarding the benefits of a multivessel PCI strategy. METHODS: A comprehensive search for published randomized controlled trials comparing multivessel PCI with culprit vessel-only PCI was conducted on ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO Services, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar, and scientific conference sessions from inception to September 15, 2019. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model to calculate the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Primary efficacy outcomes were all-cause mortality and reinfarction. RESULTS: Ten randomized controlled trials were included, representing 7,030 patients: 3,426 underwent multivessel PCI and 3,604 received culprit vessel-only PCI. Compared with culprit vessel-only PCI, multivessel PCI was associated with no significant difference in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.68 to 1.05) and lower risk for reinfarction (RR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.50 to 0.95), cardiovascular mortality (RR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.50 to 1.00), and repeat revascularization (RR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.25 to 0.44). Major bleeding (RR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.50 to 1.67), stroke (RR: 1.15; 95% CI: 0.65 to 2.01), and contrast-induced nephropathy (RR: 1.25; 95% CI: 0.80 to 1.95) were not significantly different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Multivessel PCI was associated with a lower risk for reinfarction, without any difference in all-cause mortality, compared with culprit vessel-only PCI in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

Pheochromocytoma-Induced Takotsubo Cardiomyopathy.

Pheochromocytoma, a rare catecholamine-secreting tumor, typically manifests itself with paroxysmal hypertension, tachycardia, headache, and diaphoresis. Less often, symptoms related to substantial hemodynamic compromise and cardiogenic shock occur. We report the case of a 66-year-old woman who presented with abdominal pain. Examination revealed a large right adrenal mass, cardiogenic shock, and severe heart failure in the presence of normal coronary arteries. Within days, the patient's hemodynamic status and left ventricular ejection fraction improved markedly. Results of imaging and biochemical tests confirmed the diagnosis of pheochromocytoma-induced takotsubo cardiomyopathy. Medical therapy and right adrenalectomy resolved the patient's heart failure, and she was asymptomatic postoperatively. We recommend awareness of the link between pheochromocytoma and takotsubo cardiomyopathy, and we discuss relevant diagnostic and management principles.

Outcomes Among Patients Transferred for Revascularization With Impella for Acute Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock from the cVAD Registry.

The outcomes for patients transferred with cardiogenic shock and later treated with revascularization and Impella support have not previously been studied. To evaluate these outcomes, patients in cardiogenic shock were recruited from the catheter-based ventricular assist device registry, a prospective registry enrolling patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with hemodynamic support using Impella 2.5 or CP. Analysis was performed on subgroups of patients who were characterized as those directly admitted to a tertiary care hospital (direct), or those transferred from an outside hospital (transfer). Patients who were transferred with acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock (AMICS) more often presented in shock were in shock longer than 24 hours, and were more likely to be on intra-aortic balloon pump but were less likely to sustain cardiac arrest. The number of pressors, EF, diseased, and treated vessels were similar between the 2 groups. Despite baseline differences, the mortality was similar in the transfer versus direct patients (47.0% vs 53.5% p = 0.19). In a multivariate model, the factors independently associated with 30-day mortality in AMICS treated with revascularization and Impella support were cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (p <0.01), age (p <0.01), and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (p = 0.02). Whether the patient was transferred or directly admittedly with AMICS was not an independent predictor of death. In conclusion, these findings suggest that considerations should be given to transfer patients with AMICS to allow them to be treated in a contemporary manner.