Initial Invasive or Conservative Strategy for Stable Coronary Disease.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain. METHODS: We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction. RESULTS: Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, -1.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ISCHEMIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01471522.).

Microeconomic Costs, Insurance, and Catastrophic Health Spending Among Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction in India: Substudy of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Ischemic heart disease is the leading cause of death in India, and treatment can be costly. Objective: To evaluate individual- and household-level costs and impoverishing effects of acute myocardial infarction among patients in Kerala, India. Design, Setting, and Participants: This investigation was a prespecified substudy of the Acute Coronary Syndrome Quality Improvement in Kerala study, a stepped-wedge, cluster randomized clinical trial conducted between November 2014 and November 2016 across 63 hospitals in Kerala, India. In this cross-sectional substudy, individual- and household-level cost data were collected 30 days after hospital discharge from a sample of 2114 respondents from November 2014 to July 2016. Data were analyzed from July through October 2018 and in March 2019. Exposures: Health insurance status. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were detailed direct and indirect cost data associated with acute myocardial infarction and respondent ability to pay as well as catastrophic health spending and distress financing. Catastrophic health spending was defined as 40% or more of household expenditures minus food costs spent on health, and distress financing was defined as borrowing money or selling assets to cover health costs. Hierarchical regression models were used to evaluate the association between health insurance and measures of financial risk. Costs were converted from Indian rupees to international dollars (represented herein as "$"). Results: Among 2114 respondents, the mean (SD) age was 62.3 (12.7) years, 1521 (71.9%) were men, 1144 (54.1%) presented with an ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and 1600 (75.7%) had no health insurance. The median (interquartile range) expenditure among respondents was $480.4 ($112.5-$1733.0) per acute myocardial infarction encounter, largely driven by in-hospital expenditures. There was greater than 15-fold variability between the 25th and 75th percentiles. Individuals with or without health insurance had similar monthly incomes and annual household expenditures, yet individuals without health insurance had approximately $400 higher out-of-pocket cardiovascular health care costs (median [interquartile range] total cardiovascular expenditures among uninsured, $560.3 [$134.1-$1733.6] vs insured, $161.4 [$23.2-$1726.9]; P < .001). Individuals without health insurance also had a 24% higher risk of catastrophic health spending (adjusted risk ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.07-1.43) and 3-fold higher risk of distress financing (adjusted risk ratio; 3.05; 95% CI, 1.45-6.44). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this study indicate that acute myocardial infarction carries substantial financial risk for patients in Kerala. Expansion of health insurance may be an important strategy for financial risk protection to disrupt the poverty cycle associated with cardiovascular diseases in India.

Health-Related Quality of Life at 30 Days Among Indian Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: Despite a high cardiovascular disease burden, data on patient-reported health status outcomes among individuals with cardiovascular disease in India are limited. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between November 2014 and November 2016, we collected health-related quality of life data among 1261 participants in the ACS QUIK trial (Acute Coronary Syndrome Quality Improvement in Kerala). We used a translated, validated version of the Seattle Angina Questionnaire administered 30 days after discharge for acute myocardial infarction, wherein higher scores represent better health status. We compared results across sex, myocardial infarction type, and randomization status using regression models that account for clustering and temporal trends. Mean (SD) age was 60.8 (13.7) years, 62% were men, and 63% presented with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. More than 2 out of 5 respondents (44%) experienced angina 30 days after hospitalization, but most (68% of respondents with angina; 27% of the total sample) experienced it less than once per week (Seattle Angina Questionnaire angina frequency score 60). Respondents rated high median (interquartile range [IQR]) scores for angina frequency (100.0 [80.0-100.0]) overall with similar unadjusted scores by sex, but between-hospitality variability was high. Median (IQR) physical limitation scale response was 58.3 (41.7-77.8), which is consistent with limitations in moderate- and high-intensity activities at 30-day follow-up. Older respondents had more angina frequency and physical limitations and lower treatment satisfaction and quality of life. Women had greater physical limitations (median [IQR], 52.8 [38.9-72.2] for women versus median [IQR], 61.1 [44.4-80.6] for men; P<0.01). Overall treatment satisfaction was high with median (IQR) score, 81.3 (75.0-93.8), but overall quality of life was lower with median (IQR) score, 66.7 (50.0-83.3). Allocation to the quality improvement intervention group had the strongest direct association with higher quality of life (difference, 4.2; P=0.03), but overall effects were modest. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the largest report of quality of life among myocardial infarction survivors in India with variability across age, sex, and quality improvement intervention status. Wide variability demonstrated across hospitals warrants further study. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02256657.

Effect of a Quality Improvement Intervention on Clinical Outcomes in Patients in India With Acute Myocardial Infarction: The ACS QUIK Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Wide heterogeneity exists in acute myocardial infarction treatment and outcomes in India. Objective: To evaluate the effect of a locally adapted quality improvement tool kit on clinical outcomes and process measures in Kerala, a southern Indian state. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cluster randomized, stepped-wedge clinical trial conducted between November 10, 2014, and November 9, 2016, in 63 hospitals in Kerala, India, with a last date of follow-up of December 31, 2016. During 5 predefined steps over the study period, hospitals were randomly selected to move in a 1-way crossover from the control group to the intervention group. Consecutively presenting patients with acute myocardial infarction were offered participation. Interventions: Hospitals provided either usual care (control group; n = 10 066 participants [step 0: n = 2915; step 1: n = 2649; step 2: n = 2251; step 3: n = 1422; step 4; n = 829; step 5: n = 0]) or care using a quality improvement tool kit (intervention group; n = 11 308 participants [step 0: n = 0; step 1: n = 662; step 2: n = 1265; step 3: n = 2432; step 4: n = 3214; step 5: n = 3735]) that consisted of audit and feedback, checklists, patient education materials, and linkage to emergency cardiovascular care and quality improvement training. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause death, reinfarction, stroke, or major bleeding using standardized definitions at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included the primary outcome's individual components, 30-day cardiovascular death, medication use, and tobacco cessation counseling. Mixed-effects logistic regression models were used to account for clustering and temporal trends. Results: Among 21 374 eligible randomized participants (mean age, 60.6 [SD, 12.0] years; n = 16 183 men [76%] ; n = 13 689 [64%] with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction), 21 079 (99%) completed the trial. The primary composite outcome was observed in 5.3% of the intervention participants and 6.4% of the control participants. The observed difference in 30-day major adverse cardiovascular event rates between the groups was not statistically significant after adjustment (adjusted risk difference, -0.09% [95% CI, -1.32% to 1.14%]; adjusted odds ratio, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.80-1.21]). The intervention group had a higher rate of medication use including reperfusion but no effect on tobacco cessation counseling. There were no unexpected adverse events reported. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with acute myocardial infarction in Kerala, India, use of a quality improvement intervention compared with usual care did not decrease a composite of 30-day major adverse cardiovascular events. Further research is needed to understand the lack of efficacy. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02256657.

Snare-assisted anterograde balloon mitral and aortic valvotomy using Inoue balloon catheter.

We performed concurrent antegrade mitral and aortic valvotomy using Inoue dilatation catheter in 3 cases of combined rheumatic mitral and aortic stenosis. Following mitral valvotomy by standard procedure, aortic valve was crossed with the help of a floatation catheter. Stiff long length guide wire was fixed in descending aorta using a snare. Inoue catheter was threaded over the wire across the aortic valve and aortic valvotomy completed. Mitral valve area increased from mean 1 cm2 to 2 cm2; aortic gradient dropped from mean of 97 mm to 36 mm. Concurrent anterograde balloon mitral and aortic valvotomy may be effective and safe.

Recurrent postcardiac injury syndrome mimicking cardiac perforation following transvenous pacing: An unusual presentation.

We report a case of recurrent postcardiac injury syndrome (PCIS) after pacemaker lead insertion. Each episode was attended by hemorrhagic pleuro-pericardial effusion with drop in hemoglobin levels leading us to consider cardiac perforation and subject the patient to surgical pericardiotomy. However, no perforation or active bleeding was detected on exploration. This unusual case illustrates the occurrence of PCIS following pacemaker lead insertion, mimicking cardiac perforation. This entity should be considered in patients who, after pacemaker lead insertion, develop pericardial and pleural effusion associated with markers of inflammation.