Ratio of Mixed Venous Oxygen Saturation-to-Pulmonary Capillary Wedge Pressure: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program.

BACKGROUND: Hemodynamic values from right heart catheterization aid diagnosis and clinical decision-making but may not predict outcomes. Mixed venous oxygen saturation percentage and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure relate to cardiac output and congestion, respectively. We theorized that a novel, simple ratio of these measurements could estimate cardiovascular prognosis. METHODS: We queried Veterans Affairs' databases for clinical, hemodynamic, and outcome data. Using the index right heart catheterization between 2010 and 2016, we calculated the ratio of mixed venous oxygen saturation-to-pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, termed ratio of saturation-to-wedge (RSW). The primary outcome was time to all-cause mortality; secondary outcome was 1-year urgent heart failure presentation. Patients were stratified into quartiles of RSW, Fick cardiac index (CI), thermodilution CI, and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure alone. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards models related comparators with outcomes. RESULTS: Of 12 019 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 9826 had values to calculate RSW (median 4.00, interquartile range, 2.67-6.05). Kaplan-Meier curves showed early, sustained separation by RSW strata. Cox modeling estimated that increasing RSW by 50% decreases mortality hazard by 19% (estimated hazard ratio, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.79-0.83], P<0.001) and secondary outcome hazard by 28% (hazard ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.70-0.74], P<0.001). Among the 3793 patients with data for all comparators, Cox models showed RSW best associated with outcomes (by both C statistics and Bayes factors). Furthermore, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure was superior to thermodilution CI and Fick CI. Multivariable adjustment attenuated without eliminating the association of RSW with outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In a large national database, RSW was superior to conventional right heart catheterization indices at assessing risk of mortality and urgent heart failure presentation. This simple calculation with routine data may contribute to clinical decision-making in this population.

Combination Therapy in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Gleaning a Practical Approach from the Randomized Trials.

In the past decade, combination therapy in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) has evolved from something PAH practitioners felt almost compelled to do, notwithstanding the absence of data, to a strategy proven by well-conducted randomized clinical trials. Whereas in the past, PAH treatment was limited to parenteral epoprostenol; today multiple drugs administrable either parenterally, inhaled, or orally have expanded the options for treating PAH patients. The SERIPHIN, AMBITION, and GRIPHON trials and emerging findings in FREEDOM-EV confirm the validity of a combined-therapy approach. Data from these trials in which either combined therapy was planned or an agent was added to background therapy have demonstrated significant reduction in the progression of disease and are on the cusp of demonstrating survival benefit. Combination therapy may be started simultaneously in some cases, but in many cases a stepped approach to initiating a second, or third, agent is better tolerated. Trials of all the specific combinations of drugs may not be possible, but a continuing trend toward treating PAH with multiple agents is likely. Currently, Food and Drug Administration-approved agents are predominantly pulmonary vasodilators acting through different pathways, with minimal impact on progression of the proliferative pulmonary arteriopathy that is the key pathologic finding in PAH. It is to be hoped that treatment strategies that result in halting progression and substantial reversal of pulmonary arteriolar obstruction will soon be discovered and available.

Erratum to: Combination Therapy in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: Gleaning a Practical Approach from the Randomized Trials.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1691791.].

Optimal medical therapy with or without percutaneous coronary intervention in women with stable coronary disease: A pre-specified subset analysis of the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive druG Evaluation (COURAGE) trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether sex-based differences exist in clinical effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) when added to optimal medical therapy (OMT) in patients with stable coronary artery disease. BACKGROUND: A prior pre-specified unadjusted analysis from COURAGE showed that women randomized to PCI had a lower rate of death or myocardial infarction during a median 4.6-year follow-up with a trend for interaction with respect to sex. METHODS: We analyzed outcomes in 338 women (15%) and 1949 men (85%) randomized to PCI plus OMT versus OMT alone after adjustment for relevant baseline characteristics. RESULTS: There was no difference in treatment effect by sex for the primary end point (death or myocardial infarction; HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.77-1.03 for women and HR, 1.02, 95% CI 0.96-1.10 for men; P for interaction = .07). Although the event rate was low, a trend for interaction by sex was nonetheless noted for hospitalization for heart failure, with only women, but not men, assigned to PCI experiencing significantly fewer events as compared to their counterparts receiving OMT alone (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.40-0.84, P < .001 for women and HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.74-1.01, P = .47 for men; P for interaction = .02). Both sexes randomized to PCI experienced significantly reduced need for subsequent revascularization (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.62-0.83, P < .001 for women; HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.79-0.89, P < .001 for men; P for interaction = .02) with evidence of a sex-based differential treatment effect. CONCLUSION: In this adjusted analysis of the COURAGE trial, there were no significant differences in treatment effect on major outcomes between men and women. However, women assigned to PCI demonstrated a greater benefit as compared to men, with a reduction in heart failure hospitalization and need for future revascularization. These exploratory observations require further prospective study.

Predicting outcome in the COURAGE trial (Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation): coronary anatomy versus ischemia.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the relative utility of anatomic and ischemic burden of coronary artery disease for predicting outcomes. BACKGROUND: Both anatomic burden and ischemic burden of coronary artery disease determine patient prognosis and influence myocardial revascularization decisions. When both measures are available, their relative utility for prognostication and management choice is controversial. METHODS: A total of 621 patients enrolled in the COURAGE (Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation) trial with baseline quantitative nuclear single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and quantitative coronary angiography were studied. Several multiple regression models were constructed to determine independent predictors of the endpoint of death, myocardial infarction (MI) (excluding periprocedural MI) and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS). Ischemic burden during stress SPECT, anatomic burden derived from angiography, left ventricular ejection fraction, and assignment to either optimal medical therapy (OMT) + percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or OMT alone were analyzed. RESULTS: In nonadjusted and adjusted regression models, anatomic burden and left ventricular ejection fraction were consistent predictors of death, MI, and NSTE-ACS, whereas ischemic burden and treatment assignment were not. There was a marginal (p = 0.03) effect of the interaction term of anatomic and ischemic burden for the prediction of clinical outcome, but separately or in combination, neither anatomy nor ischemia interacted with therapeutic strategy to predict outcome. CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of patients treated with OMT, anatomic burden was a consistent predictor of death, MI, and NSTE-ACS, whereas ischemic burden was not. Importantly, neither determination, even in combination, identified a patient profile benefiting preferentially from an invasive therapeutic strategy. (Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation [COURAGE]; NCT00007657).

QRS duration predicts death and hospitalization among patients with atrial fibrillation irrespective of heart failure: evidence from the AFFIRM study.

AIMS: The association of QRS duration (QRSd) with morbidity and mortality is understudied in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). We sought to assess any association of prolonged QRS with increased risk of death or hospitalization among patients with AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: QRS duration was retrieved from the baseline electrocardiograms of patients enroled in the Atrial Fibrillation Follow-Up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) study and divided into three categories: <90, 90-119, ≥120 ms. Cox models were applied relating the hazards of mortality and hospitalizations to QRSd. Among 3804 patients with AF, 593 died and 2305 were hospitalized. Compared with those with QRS < 90 ms, patients with QRS ≥ 120 ms, had an increased mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 1.61, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.29-2.03, P < 0.001] and hospitalizations (HR 1.14, 95% CI: 1.07-1.34, P = 0.043) over an average follow-up of 3.5 years. Importantly, for patients with QRS 90-119 ms, mortality and hospitalization were also increased (HR 1.31, P = 0.005 and 1.11, P = 0.026, respectively). In subgroup analysis based on heart failure (HF) status (previously documented or ejection fraction <40%), mortality was increased for QRS ≥ 120 ms patients with (HR 1.87, P < 0.001) and without HF (HR 1.63, P = 0.02). In the QRS 90-119 ms group, mortality was increased (HR 1.38, P = 0.03) for those with HF, but not significantly among those without HF (HR 1.23, P = 0.14). CONCLUSION: Among patients with AF, QRSd ≥ 120 ms was associated with a substantially increased risk for mortality (all-cause, cardiovascular, and arrhythmic) and hospitalization. Interestingly, an increased mortality was also observed among those with QRS 90-119 ms and concomitant HF.

Prognostic importance of coronary anatomy and left ventricular ejection fraction despite optimal therapy: assessment of residual risk in the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive DruG Evaluation Trial.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown if baseline angiographic findings can be used to estimate residual risk of patients with chronic stable angina treated with both optimal medical therapy (OMT) and protocol-assigned or symptom-driven percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: Death, myocardial infarction (MI), and hospitalization for non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome were adjudicated in 2,275 COURAGE patients. The number of vessels diseased (VD) was defined as the number of major coronary arteries with ≥50% diameter stenosis. Proximal left anterior descending, either isolated or in combination with other disease, was also evaluated. Depressed left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was defined as ≤50%. Cox regression analyses included these anatomical factors as well as interaction terms for initial treatment assignment (OMT or OMT + PCI). RESULTS: Percutaneous coronary intervention and proximal left anterior descending did not influence any outcome. Death was predicted by low LVEF (hazard ratio [HR] 1.86, CI 1.34-2.59, P < .001) and VD (HR 1.45, CI 1.20-1.75, P < .001). Myocardial infarction and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome were predicted only by VD (HR 1.53, CI 1.30-1.81 and HR 1.24, CI 1.06-1.44, P = .007, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In spite of OMT and irrespective of protocol-assigned or clinically driven PCI, LVEF and angiographic burden of disease at baseline retain prognostic power and reflect residual risk for secondary ischemic events.

Successful ventricular assist device placement in transposition of the great arteries with pulmonary hypertension.

The use of ventricular assist devices in patients with complex congenital heart disease has not been well described. We present a case of successful ventricular assist device support in a 38-year-old man with congenitally corrected transposition of the great arteries and severe secondary pulmonary hypertension.

Increased mortality among patients taking digoxin--analysis from the AFFIRM study.

AIMS: Digoxin is frequently used for rate control of atrial fibrillation (AF). It has, however, been associated with increased mortality. It remains unclear whether digoxin itself is responsible for the increased mortality (toxic drug effect) or whether it is prescribed to sicker patients with inherently higher mortality due to comorbidities. The goal of our study was to determine the relationship between digoxin and mortality in patients with AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: The association between digoxin and mortality was assessed in patients enrolled in the AF Follow-Up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) trial using multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. Analyses were conducted in all patients and in subsets according to the presence or absence of heart failure (HF), as defined by a history of HF and/or an ejection fraction <40%. Digoxin was associated with an increase in all-cause mortality [estimated hazard ratio (EHR) 1.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19-1.67, P < 0.001], cardiovascular mortality (EHR 1.35, 95% CI 1.06-1.71, P = 0.016), and arrhythmic mortality (EHR 1.61, 95% CI 1.12-2.30, P = 0.009). The all-cause mortality was increased with digoxin in patients without or with HF (EHR 1.37, 95% CI 1.05-1.79, P = 0.019 and EHR 1.41, 95% CI 1.09-1.84, P = 0.010, respectively). There was no significant digoxin-gender interaction for all-cause (P = 0.70) or cardiovascular (P = 0.95) mortality. CONCLUSION: Digoxin was associated with a significant increase in all-cause mortality in patients with AF after correcting for clinical characteristics and comorbidities, regardless of gender or of the presence or absence of HF. These findings call into question the widespread use of digoxin in patients with AF.

Do major cardiovascular outcomes in patients with stable ischemic heart disease in the clinical outcomes utilizing revascularization and aggressive drug evaluation trial differ by healthcare system?

BACKGROUND: The Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation (COURAGE) trial enrolled patients from 3 distinct healthcare systems (HCSs) in North America. The primary aim of this study was to determine whether there is a treatment difference in cardiovascular outcomes by HCS. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study population included 968 patients from the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), 386 from the US non-VA, and 931 from Canada with different comorbidities and prognoses. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality or nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) during the median 4.6-year follow-up. Baseline demographics were similar between percutaneous coronary intervention and optimal medical therapy treatment groups within each HCS. After follow-up, the primary end point of total mortality and nonfatal MI was not statistically significant between percutaneous coronary intervention and optimal medical therapy, regardless of HCS: VA, 22.3% versus 21.9% (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.80-1.38; P=0.95); US non-VA, 15.8% versus 21.8% (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.43-1.12; P=0.24); Canadian HCS, 17.3% versus 13.5% (hazard ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.93-1.83; P=0.17). The interaction between HCSs and treatment was not statistically significant. Long-term mortality was significantly higher in the VA system as a result of significantly greater comorbidity and worse left ventricular function. CONCLUSIONS: In the COURAGE trial, addition of percutaneous coronary intervention to optimal medical therapy did not improve 5-year survival or reduce MI or other major adverse cardiovascular events regardless of whether patients were Canadian or American or US veterans or non-veterans. Outcome differences were largely explained by differences in baseline characteristics known to affect long-term prognosis.

Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease.

BACKGROUND: In patients with stable coronary artery disease, it remains unclear whether an initial management strategy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with intensive pharmacologic therapy and lifestyle intervention (optimal medical therapy) is superior to optimal medical therapy alone in reducing the risk of cardiovascular events. METHODS: We conducted a randomized trial involving 2287 patients who had objective evidence of myocardial ischemia and significant coronary artery disease at 50 U.S. and Canadian centers. Between 1999 and 2004, we assigned 1149 patients to undergo PCI with optimal medical therapy (PCI group) and 1138 to receive optimal medical therapy alone (medical-therapy group). The primary outcome was death from any cause and nonfatal myocardial infarction during a follow-up period of 2.5 to 7.0 years (median, 4.6). RESULTS: There were 211 primary events in the PCI group and 202 events in the medical-therapy group. The 4.6-year cumulative primary-event rates were 19.0% in the PCI group and 18.5% in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio for the PCI group, 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87 to 1.27; P=0.62). There were no significant differences between the PCI group and the medical-therapy group in the composite of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke (20.0% vs. 19.5%; hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.27; P=0.62); hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome (12.4% vs. 11.8%; hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.37; P=0.56); or myocardial infarction (13.2% vs. 12.3%; hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.43; P=0.33). CONCLUSIONS: As an initial management strategy in patients with stable coronary artery disease, PCI did not reduce the risk of death, myocardial infarction, or other major cardiovascular events when added to optimal medical therapy. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00007657 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Impact of drug-eluting stents on outcomes of patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing percutaneous coronary revascularization.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: End-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients on chronic dialysis are at heightened risk for target vessel revascularization (TVR) after coronary stenting. However, ESRD patients were excluded from the trials that demonstrated the superiority of drug-eluting stents (DES) over bare metal stents (BMS) in reducing TVR. We sought to identify the impact of stent type (DES versus BMS) on TVR and other cardiac adverse events in ESRD patients. METHODS: The study included 89 consecutive ESRD patients who underwent coronary stenting and were followed for greater than or equal to 9 months. TVR was the primary endpoint, and the secondary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI) and TVR. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to adjust for differences in clinical and procedural characteristics. RESULTS: DES were used in 24 and BMS in 65 patients. The stent diameter was smaller (p = 0.008), but the stent length was longer (p = 0.006) in the DES group. TVR was required in 1 (4%) of DES and 17 (26%) BMS patients, while 8 (33%) DES and 39 (60%) BMS patients met the secondary endpoint. By multivariate logistic regression, DES use was associated with a significant reduction in TVR (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.006-0.844; p = 0.036) and a significant reduction in death, MI and TVR (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.022-0.513; p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: A high rate of ischemic events was noted for ESRD patients, regardless of stent type. However, in ESRD patients undergoing coronary revascularization, DES use is effective in reducing 9-month TVR and the composite of death, MI and TVR.