The safety and efficacy of systemic versus catheter-based therapies: application of a prognostic model by a pulmonary embolism response team.

The decision by pulmonary embolism response teams (PERTs) to utilize anticoagulation (AC) with or without systemic thrombolysis (ST) or catheter-directed therapies (CDT) for pulmonary embolism (PE) is a balance between the desire for a positive outcome and safety. Our primary aim was to develop a predictive model of in-hospital mortality for patients with high- or intermediate-risk PE managed by PERT while externally validating this model. Our secondary aim was to compare the relative safety and efficacy of ST and CDT in this cohort. Consecutive patients hospitalized between June 2014 and January 2020 at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation and The University of Rochester with acute high- or intermediate-risk PE managed by PERT were retrospectively evaluated. Groups were stratified by treatment strategy. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, and secondary outcome was major bleeding. A logistic regression model to predict the primary outcome was built using the derivation cohort, with 100-fold bootstrapping for internal validation. External validation was performed and the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) was calculated. Of 549 included patients, 421 received AC alone, 71 received ST, and 64 received CDT. Predictors of major bleeding include ESC risk category, PESI score, hypoxia, hemodynamic instability, and serum lactate. CDT trended towards lower mortality but with an increased risk of bleeding relative to ST (OR = 0.42; 95% CI [0.15, 1.17] and OR = 2.14; 95% CI [0.9, 5.06] respectively). In the multivariable logistic regression model in the derivation institution cohort, predictors of in-hospital mortality were age, cancer, hemodynamic instability requiring vasopressors, and elevated NT-proBNP (AUC = 0.86). This model was validated using the validation institution cohort (AUC = 0.88). We report an externally-validated model for predicting in-hospital mortality in patients with PE managed by PERT. The decision by PERT to initiate CDT or ST for these patients had no impact on mortality or major bleeding, yet the long-term efficacy of these interventions needs to be elucidated.

Simultaneous Pulmonary Artery Pressure and Left Ventricle Stroke Volume Assessment Predicts Adverse Events in Patients With Pulmonary Embolism.

Background Certain echocardiographic parameters may serve as early predictors of adverse events in patients with hemodynamically compromising pulmonary embolism (PE). Methods and Results An observational analysis was conducted for patients with acute pulmonary embolism evaluated by a Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (PERT) between 2014 and 2020. The performance of clinical prediction algorithms including the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index and Carl Bova score were compared using a ratio of right ventricle and left ventricle hemodynamics by dividing the pulmonary artery systolic pressure by the left ventricle stroke volume. The primary outcome of in-hospital mortality, cardiac arrest, and the need for advanced therapies was evaluated by univariate and multivariable analyses. Of the 343 patients meeting the inclusion criteria, 215 had complete data. Pulmonary artery systolic pressure/left ventricle stroke volume was a clear predictor of the primary end point (odds ratio [OR], 2.31; P=0.005), performing as well or better than the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (OR, 1.43; P=0.06) or the Bova score (OR, 1.28; P=0.01). Conclusions This study is the first study to demonstrate the utility of early pulmonary artery systolic pressure/left ventricle stroke volume in predicting adverse clinical events in patients with acute pulmonary embolism. Pulmonary artery systolic pressure/left ventricle stroke volume may be a surrogate marker of ventricular asynchrony in high-risk pulmonary embolism and should be prognostically evaluated.

Effect of aspirin on short-term outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by SARS-CoV-2 is an ongoing viral pandemic marked by increased risk of thrombotic events. However, the role of platelets in the elevated observed thrombotic risk in COVID-19 and utility of antiplatelet agents in attenuating thrombosis is unknown. We aimed to determine if the antiplatelet effect of aspirin may mitigate risk of myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, and venous thromboembolism in COVID-19. We evaluated 22,072 symptomatic patients tested for COVID-19. Propensity-matched analyses were performed to determine if treatment with aspirin or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) affected thrombotic outcomes in COVID-19. Neither aspirin nor NSAIDs affected mortality in COVID-19. Thus, aspirin does not appear to prevent thrombosis and death in COVID-19. The mechanisms of thrombosis in COVID-19, therefore, appear distinct and the role of platelets as direct mediators of SARS-CoV-2-mediated thrombosis warrants further investigation.

Impella CP Implantation during Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation for Cardiac Arrest: A Multicenter Experience.

BACKGROUND: Impella CP is a left ventricular pump which may serve as a circulatory support during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for cardiac arrest (CA). Nevertheless, the survival rate and factors associated with survival in patients undergoing Impella insertion during CPR for CA are unknown. METHODS: We performed a retrospective multicenter international registry of patients undergoing Impella insertion during on-going CPR for in- or out-of-hospital CA. We recorded immediate and 30-day survival with and without neurologic impairment using the cerebral performance category score and evaluated the factors associated with survival. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients had an Impella CP implanted during CPR for CA. Refractory ventricular arrhythmias were the most frequent initial rhythm (65.7%). In total, 65.7% of patients immediately survived. At 30 days, 45.7% of patients were still alive. The 30-day survival rate without neurological impairment was 37.1%. In univariate analysis, survival was associated with both an age < 75 years and a time from arrest to CPR ≤ 5 min (p = 0.035 and p = 0.008, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In our multicenter registry, Impella CP insertion during ongoing CPR for CA was associated with a 37.1% rate of 30-day survival without neurological impairment. The factors associated with survival were a young age and a time from arrest to CPR ≤ 5 min.

Medical management of acute heart failure.

Despite recent advances in the treatment of chronic heart failure, therapeutic options for acute heart failure (AHF) remain limited. AHF admissions are associated with significant multi-organ dysfunction, especially worsening renal failure, which results in significant morbidity and mortality. There are several aspects of AHF management: diagnosis, decongestion, vasoactive therapy, goal-directed medical therapy initiation and safe transition of care. Effective diagnosis and prognostication could be very helpful in an acute setting and rely upon biomarker evaluation with noninvasive assessment of fluid status. Decongestive strategies could be tailored to include pharmaceutical options along with consideration of utilizing ultrafiltration for refractory hypervolemia. Vasoactive agents to augment cardiac function have been evaluated in patients with AHF but have shown to only have limited efficacy. Post stabilization, initiation of quadruple goal-directed medical therapy-angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, mineral receptor antagonists, sodium glucose type 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, and beta blockers-to prevent myocardial remodeling is being advocated as a standard of care. Safe transition of care is needed prior to discharge to prevent heart failure rehospitalization and mortality. Post-discharge close ambulatory monitoring (including remote hemodynamic monitoring), virtual visits, and rehabilitation are some of the strategies to consider. We hereby review the contemporary approach in AHF diagnosis and management.

Outcomes of Impella CP insertion during cardiac arrest: A single center experience.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the outcomes of patients with an Impella CP percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (MCS) device deployed during a cardiac arrest. BACKGROUND: The Impella CP device is indicated for left ventricular support in patients with cardiogenic shock. The utility of percutaneous MCS in the setting of cardiac arrest during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) remains unclear. METHODS: We retrospectively examined data from patients supported with an Impella CP device for cardiogenic shock complicated by cardiac arrest between April 2015 and April 2017 at a single academic medical center. Patients with cardiac arrest who underwent Impella CP placement during CPR were compared to those who had return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) prior to Impella CP placement. RESULTS: We identified 22 patients with cardiogenic shock complicated by cardiac arrest (average age 64 years, 23% female) who underwent placement of an Impella CP device. The majority of patients (68%) underwent support for cardiogenic shock secondary to an acute myocardial infarction. Seven of the 22 patients (32%) underwent Impella CP placement during CPR and 15 (68%) underwent Impella CP insertion following ROSC. The in-hospital mortality was 86% in the group of patients who had the Impella CP placed during CPR and 56% in the group with ROSC prior to Impella CP insertion, (p = 0.19). CONCLUSIONS: Based on our single center retrospective analysis, the mortality rate of patients undergoing placement of an Impella CP during CPR is 86%. Further study is necessary to better understand the utility of the Impella CP mechanical circulatory support device during a cardiac arrest.

SARS-CoV-2 Receptors are Expressed on Human Platelets and the Effect of Aspirin on Clinical Outcomes in COVID-19 Patients.

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) caused by SARS-CoV-2 is an ongoing viral pandemic marked by increased risk of thrombotic events. However, the role of platelets in the elevated observed thrombotic risk in COVID-19 and utility of anti-platelet agents in attenuating thrombosis is unknown. We aimed to determine if human platelets express the known SARS-CoV-2 receptor-protease axis on their cell surface and assess whether the anti-platelet effect of aspirin may mitigate risk of myocardial infarction (MI), cerebrovascular accident (CVA), and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in COVID-19. Expression of ACE2 and TMPRSS2 on human platelets were detected by immunoblotting and confirmed by confocal microscopy. We evaluated 22,072 symptomatic patients tested for COVID-19. Propensity-matched analyses were performed to determine if treatment with aspirin or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) affected thrombotic outcomes in COVID-19. Neither aspirin nor NSAIDs affected mortality in COVID-19. However, both aspirin and NSAID therapies were associated with increased risk of the combined thrombotic endpoint of (MI), (CVA), and (VTE). Thus, while platelets clearly express ACE2-TMPRSS2 receptor-protease axis for SARS-CoV-2 infection, aspirin does not prevent thrombosis and death in COVID-19. The mechanisms of thrombosis in COVID-19, therefore, appears distinct and the role of platelets as direct mediators of SARS-CoV-2-mediated thrombosis warrants further investigation.