Early Serial Assessment of Aggregate Vasoactive Support and Mortality in Cardiogenic Shock: Insights From the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network Registry.

BACKGROUND: Associations of early changes in vasoactive support with cardiogenic shock (CS) mortality remain incompletely defined. METHODS: The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network is a multicenter registry of cardiac intensive care units. Patients admitted with CS (2018-2023) had vasoactive dosing assessed at 4 and 24 hours from cardiac intensive care unit admission and quantified by the vasoactive-inotropic score (VIS). Prognostic associations of VIS at both time points, as well as change in VIS from 4 to 24 hours, were examined. Interaction testing was performed based on mechanical circulatory support status. RESULTS: Among 3665 patients, 82% had a change in VIS <10, with 7% and 11% having a ≥10-point increase and decrease from 4 to 24 hours, respectively. The 4 and 24-hour VIS were each associated with cardiac intensive care unit mortality (13%-45% and 11%-73% for VIS <10 to ≥40, respectively; Ptrend <0.0001 for each). Stratifying by the 4-hour VIS, changes in VIS from 4 to 24 hours had a graded association with mortality, ranging from a 2- to >4-fold difference in mortality comparing those with a ≥10-point increase to ≥10-point decrease in VIS (Ptrend <0.0001). The change in VIS alone provided good discrimination of cardiac intensive care unit mortality (C-statistic, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.70-0.75]) and improved discrimination of the 24-hour Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (0.72 [95% CI, 0.69-0.74] to 0.76 [95% CI, 0.74-0.78]) and the clinician-assessed Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions shock stage (0.72 [95% CI, 0.70-0.74] to 0.77 [95% CI, 0.75-0.79]). Although present in both groups, the mortality risk associated with VIS was attenuated in patients managed with versus without mechanical circulatory support (odds ratio per 10-point higher 24-hour VIS, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.23-1.49] versus 1.84 [95% CI, 1.69-2.01]; Pinteraction <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Early changes in the magnitude of vasoactive support in CS are associated with a gradient of risk for mortality. These data suggest that early VIS trajectory may improve CS prognostication, with the potential to be leveraged for clinical decision-making and research applications in CS.

Modes of Death in Patients with Cardiogenic Shock in the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit: A Report from the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on how patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) die. METHODS: The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network is a research network of cardiac intensive care units coordinated by the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) Study Group (Boston, MA). Using standardized definitions, site investigators classified direct modes of in-hospital death for CS admissions (October 2021 to September 2022). Mutually exclusive categories included 4 modes of cardiovascular death and 4 modes of noncardiovascular death. Subgroups defined by CS type, preceding cardiac arrest (CA), use of temporary mechanical circulatory support (tMCS), and transition to comfort measures were evaluated. RESULTS: Among 1068 CS cases, 337 (31.6%) died during the index hospitalization. Overall, the mode of death was cardiovascular in 82.2%. Persistent CS was the dominant specific mode of death (66.5%), followed by arrhythmia (12.8%), anoxic brain injury (6.2%), and respiratory failure (4.5%). Patients with preceding CA were more likely to die from anoxic brain injury (17.1% vs 0.9%; P < .001) or arrhythmia (21.6% vs 8.4%; P < .001). Patients managed with tMCS were more likely to die from persistent shock (P < .01), both cardiogenic (73.5% vs 62.0%) and noncardiogenic (6.1% vs 2.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Most deaths in CS are related to direct cardiovascular causes, particularly persistent CS. However, there is important heterogeneity across subgroups defined by preceding CA and the use of tMCS.

Interhospital Variation in Admissions Managed With Critical Care Therapies or Invasive Hemodynamic Monitoring in Tertiary Cardiac Intensive Care Units: An Analysis From the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network Registry.

BACKGROUND: Wide interhospital variations exist in cardiovascular intensive care unit (CICU) admission practices and the use of critical care restricted therapies (CCRx), but little is known about the differences in patient acuity, CCRx utilization, and the associated outcomes within tertiary centers. METHODS: The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network is a multicenter registry of tertiary and academic CICUs in the United States and Canada that captured consecutive admissions in 2-month periods between 2017 and 2022. This analysis included 17 843 admissions across 34 sites and compared interhospital tertiles of CCRx (eg, mechanical ventilation, mechanical circulatory support, continuous renal replacement therapy) utilization and its adjusted association with in-hospital survival using logistic regression. The Pratt index was used to quantify patient-related and institutional factors associated with CCRx variability. RESULTS: The median age of the study population was 66 (56-77) years and 37% were female. CCRx was provided to 62.2% (interhospital range of 21.3%-87.1%) of CICU patients. Admissions to CICUs with the highest tertile of CCRx utilization had a greater burden of comorbidities, had more diagnoses of ST-elevation myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, or cardiogenic shock, and had higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores. The unadjusted in-hospital mortality (median, 12.7%) was 9.6%, 11.1%, and 18.7% in low, intermediate, and high CCRx tertiles, respectively. No clinically meaningful differences in adjusted mortality were observed across tertiles when admissions were stratified by the provision of CCRx. Baseline patient-level variables and institutional differences accounted for 80% and 5.3% of the observed CCRx variability, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a large registry of tertiary and academic CICUs, there was a >4-fold interhospital variation in the provision of CCRx that was primarily driven by differences in patient acuity compared with institutional differences. No differences were observed in adjusted mortality between low, intermediate, and high CCRx utilization sites.

Prognostic significance of haemodynamic parameters in patients with cardiogenic shock.

AIMS: Invasive haemodynamic assessment with a pulmonary artery catheter is often used to guide the management of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) and may provide important prognostic information. We aimed to assess prognostic associations and relationships to end-organ dysfunction of presenting haemodynamic parameters in CS. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network is an investigator-initiated multicenter registry of cardiac intensive care units (CICUs) in North America coordinated by the TIMI Study Group. Patients with CS (2018-2022) who underwent invasive haemodynamic assessment within 24 h of CICU admission were included. Associations of haemodynamic parameters with in-hospital mortality were assessed using logistic regression, and associations with presenting serum lactate were assessed using least squares means regression. Sensitivity analyses were performed excluding patients on temporary mechanical circulatory support and adjusted for vasoactive-inotropic score. Among the 3603 admissions with CS, 1473 had haemodynamic data collected within 24 h of CICU admission. The median cardiac index was 1.9 (25th-75th percentile, 1.6-2.4) L/min/m2 and mean arterial pressure (MAP) was 74 (66-86) mmHg. Parameters associated with mortality included low MAP, low systolic blood pressure, low systemic vascular resistance, elevated right atrial pressure (RAP), elevated RAP/pulmonary capillary wedge pressure ratio, and low pulmonary artery pulsatility index. These associations were generally consistent when controlling for the intensity of background pharmacologic and mechanical haemodynamic support. These parameters were also associated with higher presenting serum lactate. CONCLUSION: In a contemporary CS population, presenting haemodynamic parameters reflecting decreased systemic arterial tone and right ventricular dysfunction are associated with adverse outcomes and systemic hypoperfusion.

Pulmonary Artery Catheter Use and Mortality in the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit.

BACKGROUND: The appropriate use of pulmonary artery catheters (PACs) in critically ill cardiac patients remains debated. OBJECTIVES: The authors aimed to characterize the current use of PACs in cardiac intensive care units (CICUs) with attention to patient-level and institutional factors influencing their application and explore the association with in-hospital mortality. METHODS: The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network is a multicenter network of CICUs in North America. Between 2017 and 2021, participating centers contributed annual 2-month snapshots of consecutive CICU admissions. Admission diagnoses, clinical and demographic data, use of PACs, and in-hospital mortality were captured. RESULTS: Among 13,618 admissions at 34 sites, 3,827 were diagnosed with shock, with 2,583 of cardiogenic etiology. The use of mechanical circulatory support and heart failure were the patient-level factors most strongly associated with a greater likelihood of the use of a PAC (OR: 5.99 [95% CI: 5.15-6.98]; P < 0.001 and OR: 3.33 [95% CI: 2.91-3.81]; P < 0.001, respectively). The proportion of shock admissions with a PAC varied significantly by study center ranging from 8% to 73%. In analyses adjusted for factors associated with their placement, PAC use was associated with lower mortality in all shock patients admitted to a CICU (OR: 0.79 [95% CI: 0.66-0.96]; P = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: There is wide variation in the use of PACs that is not fully explained by patient level-factors and appears driven in part by institutional tendency. PAC use was associated with higher survival in cardiac patients with shock presenting to CICUs. Randomized trials are needed to guide the appropriate use of PACs in cardiac critical care.

Presentation and Outcomes of Patients With Preoperative Critical Illness Undergoing Cardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the prevalence and post-surgical outcomes associated with cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) therapeutics among CICU patients referred for cardiac surgery. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of CICU patients referred for cardiac surgery from the intensive care unit. METHODS: We analyzed characteristics and outcomes of CICU admissions referred from the CICU for cardiac surgery during 2017 to 2020 across 29 centers. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Among 10,321 CICU admissions, 887 (8.6%) underwent cardiac surgery, including 406 (46%) coronary artery bypass graftings, 201 (23%) transplants or ventricular assist devices, 171 (19%) valve surgeries, and 109 (12%) other procedures. Common indications for CICU admission included shock (33.5%) and respiratory insufficiency (24.9%). Preoperative CICU therapies included vasoactive therapy in 52.2%, mechanical circulatory support in 35.9%, renal replacement in 8.2%, mechanical ventilation in 35.7%, and 17.5% with high-flow nasal cannula or noninvasive positive pressure ventilation. In-hospital mortality was 11.7% among all CICU admissions and 9.1% among patients treated with cardiac surgery. After multivariable adjustment, pre-op mechanical circulatory support and renal replacement therapy were associated with mortality, while respiratory support and vasoactive therapy were not. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly 1 in 12 contemporary CICU patients receive cardiac surgery. Despite high preoperative disease severity, CICU admissions undergoing cardiac surgery had a comparable mortality rate to CICU patients overall; highlighting the ability of clinicians to select higher acuity patients with a reasonable perioperative risk.

Association between Obesity and Length of COVID-19 Hospitalization: Unexpected Insights from the American Heart Association National COVID-19 Registry.

Background: The mechanism for possible association between obesity and poor clinical outcomes from Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unclear. Methods: We analyzed 22,915 adult COVID-19 patients hospitalized from March 2020 to April 2021 to non-intensive care using the American Heart Association National COVID Registry. A multivariable Poisson model adjusted for age, sex, medical history, admission respiratory status, hospitalization characteristics, and laboratory findings was used to calculate length of stay (LOS) as a function of body mass index (BMI). We similarly analyzed 5,327 patients admitted to intensive care for comparison. Results: Relative to normal BMI subjects, overweight, class I obese, and class II obese patients had approximately half-day reductions in LOS (-0.469 days, P<0.01; -0.480 days, P<0.01; -0.578 days, P<0.01, respectively). Conclusion: The model identified a dose-dependent, inverse relationship between BMI category and LOS for COVID-19, which was not seen when the model was applied to critically ill patients.

Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network (CCCTN): a cohort profile.

AIMS: The aims of the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network (CCCTN) are to develop a registry to investigate the epidemiology of cardiac critical illness and to establish a multicentre research network to conduct randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in patients with cardiac critical illness. METHODS AND RESULTS: The CCCTN was founded in 2017 with 16 centres and has grown to a research network of over 40 academic and clinical centres in the United States and Canada. Each centre enters data for consecutive cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) admissions for at least 2 months of each calendar year. More than 20 000 unique CICU admissions are now included in the CCCTN Registry. To date, scientific observations from the CCCTN Registry include description of variations in care, the epidemiology and outcomes of all CICU patients, as well as subsets of patients with specific disease states, such as shock, heart failure, renal dysfunction, and respiratory failure. The CCCTN has also characterised utilization patterns, including use of mechanical circulatory support in response to changes in the heart transplantation allocation system, and the use and impact of multidisciplinary shock teams. Over years of multicentre collaboration, the CCCTN has established a robust research network to facilitate multicentre registry-based randomised trials in patients with cardiac critical illness. CONCLUSION: The CCCTN is a large, prospective registry dedicated to describing processes-of-care and expanding clinical knowledge in cardiac critical illness. The CCCTN will serve as an investigational platform from which to conduct randomised controlled trials in this important patient population.

The shock team: a multidisciplinary approach to early patient phenotyping and appropriate care escalation in cardiogenic shock.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a highly morbid condition with mortality remaining greater than 30% despite improved pathophysiologic understanding and access to mechanical circulatory support (MCS). In response, shock teams modeled on successful multidisciplinary care structures for other diseases are being implemented nationwide. RECENT FINDINGS: Primary data supporting a benefit of shock team implementation on patient outcomes are relatively limited and entirely observational. Four single-center before-and-after studies and one multicenter registry study have demonstrated improved outcomes in patients with CS, potentially driven by increased pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) utilization and earlier (and more appropriate) initiation of MCS. Shock teams are also supported by a growing body of literature recognizing the independent benefit of the interventions they seek to implement, including patient phenotyping with PAC use and an algorithmic approach to CS care. Though debated, MCS is also highly likely to improve CS outcomes when applied appropriately, which further supports a multidisciplinary shock team approach to patient and device selection. SUMMARY: Shock teams likely improve patient outcomes by facilitating early patient phenotyping and appropriate intervention. Institutions should strongly consider adopting a multidisciplinary shock team approach to CS care, though additional data supporting these interventions are needed.

N-Terminal Pro-B-Type Natriuretic Peptide as a Biomarker for the Severity and Outcomes With COVID-19 in a Nationwide Hospitalized Cohort.

Background Currently, there is limited research on the prognostic value of NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide) as a biomarker in COVID-19. We proposed the a priori hypothesis that an elevated NT-proBNP concentration at admission is associated with increased in-hospital mortality. Methods and Results In this prospective, observational cohort study of the American Heart Association's COVID-19 Cardiovascular Disease Registry, 4675 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were divided into normal and elevated NT-proBNP cohorts by standard age-adjusted heart failure thresholds, as well as separated by quintiles. Patients with elevated NT-proBNP (n=1344; 28.7%) were older, with more cardiovascular risk factors, and had a significantly higher rate of in-hospital mortality (37% versus 16%; P<0.001) and shorter median time to death (7 versus 9 days; P<0.001) than those with normal values. Analysis by quintile of NT-proBNP revealed a steep graded relationship with mortality (7.1%-40.2%; P<0.001). NT-proBNP was also associated with major adverse cardiac events, intensive care unit admission, intubation, shock, and cardiac arrest (P<0.001 for each). In subgroup analyses, NT-proBNP, but not prior heart failure, was associated with increased risk of in-hospital mortality. Adjusting for cardiovascular risk factors with presenting vital signs, an elevated NT-proBNP was associated with 2-fold higher adjusted odds of death (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.23; 95% CI, 1.80-2.76), and the log-transformed NT-proBNP with other biomarkers projected a 21% increased risk of death for each 2-fold increase (adjusted OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.08-1.34). Conclusions Elevated NT-proBNP levels on admission for COVID-19 are associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality and other complications in patients with and without heart failure.

Mitochondria-Rich Extracellular Vesicles Rescue Patient-Specific Cardiomyocytes From Doxorubicin Injury: Insights Into the SENECA Trial.

BACKGROUND: Anthracycline-induced cardiomyopathy (AIC) is a significant source of morbidity and mortality in cancer survivors. The role of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in treating AIC was evaluated in the SENECA trial, a Phase 1 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-sponsored study, but the mechanisms underpinning efficacy in human tissue need clarification. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to perform an in vitro clinical trial evaluating the efficacy and putative mechanisms of SENECA trial-specific MSCs in treating doxorubicin (DOX) injury, using patient-specific induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes (iCMs) generated from SENECA patients. METHODS: Patient-specific iCMs were injured with 1 µmol/L DOX for 24 hours, treated with extracellular vesicles (EVs) from MSCs by either coculture or direct incubation and then assessed for viability and markers of improved cellular physiology. MSC-derived EVs were separated into large extracellular vesicles (L-EVs) (>200 nm) and small EVs (<220nm) using a novel filtration system. RESULTS: iCMs cocultured with MSCs in a transwell system demonstrated improved iCM viability and attenuated apoptosis. L-EVs but not small EVs recapitulated this therapeutic effect. L-EVs were found to be enriched in mitochondria, which were shown to be taken up by iCMs. iCMs treated with L-EVs demonstrated improved contractility, reactive oxygen species production, ATP production, and mitochondrial biogenesis. Inhibiting L-EV mitochondrial function with 1-methyl-4-phenylpyridinium attenuated efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: L-EV-mediated mitochondrial transfer mitigates DOX injury in patient-specific iCMs. Although SENECA was not designed to test MSC efficacy, consistent tendencies toward a positive effect were observed across endpoints. Our results suggest a mechanism by which MSCs may improve cardiovascular performance in AIC independent of regeneration, which could inform future trial design evaluating the therapeutic potential of MSCs.

The Use of Factor Eight Inhibitor Bypass Activity (FEIBA) for the Treatment of Perioperative Hemorrhage in Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation.

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that factor eight inhibitor bypassing activity (FEIBA) can be used to control bleeding following left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation without increasing the 14-day composite thrombotic outcome of pump thrombus, ischemic cerebrovascular accidents, pulmonary embolism, and deep venous thrombosis. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Academic hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred nineteen consecutive patients who underwent LVAD implantation (December 1, 2009 to December 30, 2018). INTERVENTION: FEIBA administered to control perioperative hemorrhage. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The 82 patients (25.7%) in the FEIBA cohort had more risk factors for perioperative hemorrhage, such as lower preoperative platelet count (169 ± 66 v 194 ± 68 × 103/mL, p = 0.004), prior cardiac surgery (36.6% v 21.9%, p = 0.008), and longer cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time (100.3 v 75.2 minutes, p = 0.001) than the 237 controls. After 16.6 units (95% CI: 14.3-18.9) of blood products were given, 992 units (95% CI: 821-1163) of FEIBA were required to control bleeding in the FEIBA cohort. Compared to the controls, there were no differences in the 14-day composite thrombotic outcome (11.0% v 7.6%, p = 0.343) or mortality rate (3.7% v 1.3%, p = 0.179). Multivariate logistical regression identified preoperative international normalized ratio (odds ratio [OR]: 1.30, 95% CI: 1.04-1.62) and CPB time (OR: 1.11, 95% CI: 1.02-1.20) as risk factors for 14-day thrombotic events, but FEIBA usage was not associated with an increased risk. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective cohort study, the use of FEIBA (∼1,000 units, ∼13 units/kg) to control perioperative hemorrhage following LVAD implantation was not associated with increases in mortality or composite thrombotic outcome.

miR-106a-363 cluster in extracellular vesicles promotes endogenous myocardial repair via Notch3 pathway in ischemic heart injury.

Endogenous capability of the post-mitotic human heart holds great promise to restore the injured myocardium. Recent evidence indicates that the extracellular vesicles (EVs) regulate cardiac homeostasis and regeneration. Here, we investigated the molecular mechanism of EVs for self-repair. We isolated EVs from human iPSC-derived cardiomyocytes (iCMs), which were exposed to hypoxic (hEVs) and normoxic conditions (nEVs), and examined their roles in in vitro and in vivo models of cardiac injury. hEV treatment significantly improved the viability of hypoxic iCMs in vitro and cardiac function of severely injured murine myocardium in vivo. Microarray analysis of the EVs revealed significantly enriched expression of the miR-106a-363 cluster (miR cluster) in hEVs vs. nEVs. This miR cluster preserved survival and contractility of hypoxia-injured iCMs and maintained murine left-ventricular (LV) chamber size, improved LV ejection fraction, and reduced myocardial fibrosis of the injured myocardium. RNA-Seq analysis identified Jag1-Notch3-Hes1 as a target intracellular pathway of the miR cluster. Moreover, the study found that the cell cycle activator and cytokinesis genes were significantly up-regulated in the iCMs treated with miR cluster and Notch3 siRNA. Together, these results suggested that the miR cluster in the EVs stimulated cardiomyocyte cell cycle re-entry by repressing Notch3 to induce cell proliferation and augment myocardial self-repair. The miR cluster may represent an effective therapeutic approach for ischemic cardiomyopathy.

COVID-19 and Disruptive Modifications to Cardiac Critical Care Delivery: JACC Review Topic of the Week.

The COVID-19 pandemic has presented a major unanticipated stress on the workforce, organizational structure, systems of care, and critical resource supplies. To ensure provider safety, to maximize efficiency, and to optimize patient outcomes, health systems need to be agile. Critical care cardiologists may be uniquely positioned to treat the numerous respiratory and cardiovascular complications of the SARS-CoV-2 and support clinicians without critical care training who may be suddenly asked to care for critically ill patients. This review draws upon the experiences of colleagues from heavily impacted regions of the United States and Europe, as well as lessons learned from military mass casualty medicine. This review offers pragmatic suggestions on how to implement scalable models for critical care delivery, cultivate educational tools for team training, and embrace technologies (e.g., telemedicine) to enable effective collaboration despite social distancing imperatives.

Current treatment guidelines for chronic hepatitis B and their applications.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Treatment practices for patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) varies across the world and several professional associations have issued treatment recommendations. This synopsis aims to review the major principles of CHB and its management, and to systematically summarize and compare the recommendations of the major treatment guidelines by: the Asian-Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver, the US Panel, the European Association for the Study of the Liver, and the American Association for the Study of the Liver. METHODS: Treatment recommendations were summarized separately for hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-positive and HBeAg-negative patients. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment for CHB is recommended on the basis of a variety of host and viral factors, and the ultimate goal of treatment is the prevention of decompensated liver disease, hepatocellular carcinoma, cirrhosis, and premature death. Despite updates and improvements in these guidelines during the past decade, greater patient and physician education as well as better noninvasive markers to identify high-risk patients are still needed. Significant improvements in the application of current practice guidelines, however, can be made by relatively simple educational efforts, and new molecular and genomic techniques may hold promise for more accurate selection of high-risk patients for further therapeutic interventions in a near future.