2024 Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics: A Report of US and Global Data From the American Heart Association.

BACKGROUND: The American Heart Association (AHA), in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular risk factors, including core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, nutrition, sleep, and obesity) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure, glucose control, and metabolic syndrome) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The AHA Heart Disease and Stroke Statistical Update presents the latest data on a range of major clinical heart and circulatory disease conditions (including stroke, brain health, complications of pregnancy, kidney disease, congenital heart disease, rhythm disorders, sudden cardiac arrest, subclinical atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, cardiomyopathy, heart failure, valvular disease, venous thromboembolism, and peripheral artery disease) and the associated outcomes (including quality of care, procedures, and economic costs). METHODS: The AHA, through its Epidemiology and Prevention Statistics Committee, continuously monitors and evaluates sources of data on heart disease and stroke in the United States and globally to provide the most current information available in the annual Statistical Update with review of published literature through the year before writing. The 2024 AHA Statistical Update is the product of a full year's worth of effort in 2023 by dedicated volunteer clinicians and scientists, committed government professionals, and AHA staff members. The AHA strives to further understand and help heal health problems inflicted by structural racism, a public health crisis that can significantly damage physical and mental health and perpetuate disparities in access to health care, education, income, housing, and several other factors vital to healthy lives. This year's edition includes additional global data, as well as data on the monitoring and benefits of cardiovascular health in the population, with an enhanced focus on health equity across several key domains. RESULTS: Each of the chapters in the Statistical Update focuses on a different topic related to heart disease and stroke statistics. CONCLUSIONS: The Statistical Update represents a critical resource for the lay public, policymakers, media professionals, clinicians, health care administrators, researchers, health advocates, and others seeking the best available data on these factors and conditions.

Days at Home After Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients.

BACKGROUND: Days at home (DAH) represents an important patient-oriented outcome that quantifies time spent at home after a medical event; however, this outcome has not been fully evaluated for low-surgical-risk patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). We sought to compare 1- and 2-year DAH (DAH365 and DAH730) among low-risk patients participating in a randomized trial of TAVR with a self-expanding bioprosthesis versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). METHODS: Using Medicare-linked data from the Evolut Low Risk trial, we identified 619 patients: 606 (322 TAVR/284 SAVR) and 593 (312 TAVR/281 SAVR) were analyzed at 1 and 2 years, respectively. DAH was calculated as days alive and spent outside a hospital, inpatient rehabilitation, skilled nursing facility, long-term acute care hospital, emergency department, or observation stay. Mean DAH was compared using the t test. RESULTS: The mean (SD) age and female sex were 74.7 (5.1) and 74.3 (4.9) years and 34.6% (115/332) and 30.3% (87/287) in TAVR and SAVR, respectively. Postprocedural discharge to rehabilitation occurred in ≤3.0% (≤10/332) in TAVR and 4.5% (13/287) in SAVR. The mean DAH365 was comparable in TAVR versus SAVR (352.2±45.4 versus 347.8±39.0; difference in days, 4.5 [95% CI, 2.3-11.2]; P=0.20). DAH730 was also comparable in TAVR versus SAVR (701.6±106.0 versus 699.6±94.5; difference in days, 2.0 [-14.1 to 18.2]; P=0.81). Secondary outcomes DAH30 and DAH90 were higher in TAVR (DAH30, 26.0±3.6 versus 20.7±6.4; difference in days, 5.3 [4.5-6.2]; P<0.001; DAH90, 85.1±8.3 versus 78.7±13.6; difference in days, 6.4 [4.6-8.2]; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In the Evolut Low Risk trial linked to Medicare, low-risk patients undergoing TAVR spend a similar number of days at home at 1 and 2 years compared with SAVR. Days spent at home at 30 and 90 days were higher in TAVR. In contrast to higher-risk patients studied in prior work, there is no clear advantage of TAVR versus SAVR for DAH in the first 2 years after AVR in low-surgical-risk patients.

Antithrombotic treatment following percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with high bleeding risk.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Review the clinical outcomes of different antithrombotic strategies in patients with high bleeding risk (HBR) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). RECENT FINDINGS: Patients with HBR after PCI include those with advanced age (e.g. >75 years of age), a prior history of major bleeding, anemia, chronic kidney disease, and those with indications for long-term anticoagulation. Strategies that successfully decrease bleeding risk in this population include shorter durations of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT; of 1-3 months) followed by single antiplatelet therapy with aspirin or a P2Y 12 inhibitor, or de-escalating from a more potent P2Y 12 inhibitor (prasugrel or ticagrelor) to less potent antiplatelet regimens (aspirin with clopidogrel or half-dose ticagrelor or half-dose prasugrel). Patients on DAPT, and a full dose anticoagulation for other indications, have a lower risk of major bleeding without an increase in 1-2-year adverse ischemic events, when rapidly switched from DAPT to a single antiplatelet therapy (within a week after PCI) with aspirin or clopidogrel. Longer term data on the benefits and risks of these strategies is lacking. SUMMARY: In patients with HBR after PCI, shorter durations of DAPT (1-3 months) decrease the risk of major bleeding without increasing the risk of adverse ischemic events.

Comparative Effectiveness of Percutaneous Microaxial Left Ventricular Assist Device vs Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump or No Mechanical Circulatory Support in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock.

Importance: Recent studies have produced inconsistent findings regarding the outcomes of the percutaneous microaxial left ventricular assist device (LVAD) during acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock (AMICS). Objective: To compare the percutaneous microaxial LVAD vs alternative treatments among patients presenting with AMICS using observational analyses of administrative data. Design, Setting, and Participants: This comparative effectiveness research study used Medicare fee-for-service claims of patients admitted with AMICS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention from October 1, 2015, through December 31, 2019. Treatment strategies were compared using (1) inverse probability of treatment weighting to estimate the effect of different baseline treatments in the overall population; (2) instrumental variable analysis to determine the effectiveness of the percutaneous microaxial LVAD among patients whose treatment was influenced by cross-sectional institutional practice patterns; (3) an instrumented difference-in-differences analysis to determine the effectiveness of treatment among patients whose treatment was influenced by longitudinal changes in institutional practice patterns; and (4) a grace period approach to determine the effectiveness of initiating the percutaneous microaxial LVAD within 2 days of percutaneous coronary intervention. Analysis took place between March 2021 and December 2022. Interventions: Percutaneous microaxial LVAD vs alternative treatments (including medical therapy and intra-aortic balloon pump). Main Outcomes and Measures: Thirty-day all-cause mortality and readmissions. Results: Of 23 478 patients, 14 264 (60.8%) were male and the mean (SD) age was 73.9 (9.8) years. In the inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis and grace period approaches, treatment with percutaneous microaxial LVAD was associated with a higher risk-adjusted 30-day mortality (risk difference, 14.9%; 95% CI, 12.9%-17.0%). However, patients receiving the percutaneous microaxial LVAD had a higher frequency of factors associated with severe illness, suggesting possible confounding by measures of illness severity not available in the data. In the instrumental variable analysis, 30-day mortality was also higher with percutaneous microaxial LVAD, but patient and hospital characteristics differed across levels of the instrumental variable, suggesting possible confounding by unmeasured variables (risk difference, 13.5%; 95% CI, 3.9%-23.2%). In the instrumented difference-in-differences analysis, the association between the percutaneous microaxial LVAD and mortality was imprecise, and differences in trends in characteristics between hospitals with different percutaneous microaxial LVAD use suggested potential assumption violations. Conclusions: In observational analyses comparing the percutaneous microaxial LVAD to alternative treatments among patients with AMICS, the percutaneous microaxial LVAD was associated with worse outcomes in some analyses, while in other analyses, the association was too imprecise to draw meaningful conclusions. However, the distribution of patient and institutional characteristics between treatment groups or groups defined by institutional differences in treatment use, including changes in use over time, combined with clinical knowledge of illness severity factors not captured in the data, suggested violations of key assumptions that are needed for valid causal inference with different observational analyses. Randomized clinical trials of mechanical support devices will allow valid comparisons across candidate treatment strategies and help resolve ongoing controversies.

Major cardiovascular events after COVID-19, event rates post-vaccination, antiviral or anti-inflammatory therapy, and temporal trends: Rationale and methodology of the CORONA-VTE-Network study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with excess risk of cardiovascular and thrombotic events in the early post-infection period and during convalescence. Despite the progress in our understanding of cardiovascular complications, uncertainty persists with respect to more recent event rates, temporal trends, association between vaccination status and outcomes, and findings within vulnerable subgroups such as older adults (aged 65 years or older), or those undergoing hemodialysis. Sex-informed findings, including results among pregnant and breastfeeding women, as well as adjusted comparisons between male and female adults are similarly understudied. METHODS: Adult patients, aged ≥18 years, with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed COVID-19 who received inpatient or outpatient care at the participating centers of the registry are eligible for inclusion. A total of 10,000 patients have been included in this multicenter study, with Brigham and Women's Hospital (Boston, MA) serving as the coordinating center. Other sites include Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Anne Arundel Medical Center, University of Virginia Medical Center, University of Colorado Health System, and Thomas Jefferson University Health System. Data elements will be ascertained manually for accuracy. The two main outcomes are 1) a composite of venous or arterial thrombotic events, and 2) a composite of major cardiovascular events, defined as venous or arterial thrombosis, myocarditis or heart failure with inpatient treatment, new atrial fibrillation/flutter, or cardiovascular death. Clinical outcomes are adjudicated by independent physicians. Vaccination status and time of inclusion in the study will be ascertained for subgroup-specific analyses. Outcomes are pre-specified to be reported separately for hospitalized patients versus those who were initially receiving outpatient care. Outcomes will be reported at 30-day and 90-day follow-up. Data cleaning at the sites and the data coordinating center and outcomes adjudication process are in-progress. CONCLUSIONS: The CORONA-VTE-Network study will share contemporary information related to rates of cardiovascular and thrombotic events in patients with COVID-19 overall, as well as within key subgroups, including by time of inclusion, vaccination status, patients undergoing hemodialysis, the elderly, and sex-informed analyses such as comparison of women and men, or among pregnant and breastfeeding women.

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2023 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association.

BACKGROUND: The American Heart Association, in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular risk factors, including core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, diet, and weight) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure, and glucose control) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The Statistical Update presents the latest data on a range of major clinical heart and circulatory disease conditions (including stroke, congenital heart disease, rhythm disorders, subclinical atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, heart failure, valvular disease, venous disease, and peripheral artery disease) and the associated outcomes (including quality of care, procedures, and economic costs). METHODS: The American Heart Association, through its Epidemiology and Prevention Statistics Committee, continuously monitors and evaluates sources of data on heart disease and stroke in the United States to provide the most current information available in the annual Statistical Update with review of published literature through the year before writing. The 2023 Statistical Update is the product of a full year's worth of effort in 2022 by dedicated volunteer clinicians and scientists, committed government professionals, and American Heart Association staff members. The American Heart Association strives to further understand and help heal health problems inflicted by structural racism, a public health crisis that can significantly damage physical and mental health and perpetuate disparities in access to health care, education, income, housing, and several other factors vital to healthy lives. This year's edition includes additional COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) publications, as well as data on the monitoring and benefits of cardiovascular health in the population, with an enhanced focus on health equity across several key domains. RESULTS: Each of the chapters in the Statistical Update focuses on a different topic related to heart disease and stroke statistics. CONCLUSIONS: The Statistical Update represents a critical resource for the lay public, policymakers, media professionals, clinicians, health care administrators, researchers, health advocates, and others seeking the best available data on these factors and conditions.

Days at home after transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients.

BACKGROUND: Days at home (DAH) quantifies time spent at home after a medical event but has not been fully evaluated for TAVR. We sought to compare 1- and 5-year DAH (DAH365, DAH1825) among high-risk patients participating in a randomized trial of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with a self-expanding bioprosthesis versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). METHODS: We linked data from the U.S. CoreValve High Risk Trial to Medicare Fee-for-Service claims in 456 patients with 450 (234 TAVR/216 SAVR) and 427 (222 TAVR/205 SAVR) analyzed at 1 and 5 years. DAH was calculated as the number of days alive and spent outside of a hospital, skilled nursing facility, rehabilitation, long-term acute care hospital, emergency department, or observation stay. RESULTS: Mean DAH365 was higher in patients who underwent TAVR compared with SAVR (295.1 ± 106.9 vs 267.8 ± 122.3, difference in days 27.2 [95% CI 6.0, 48.5], P = .01). Compared with SAVR, TAVR patients had a shorter index length of stay (LOS) (7.4 ± 4.5 vs 12.5 ± 9.0, difference in days -5.1 [-6.5, -3.8], P < .001). The largest contributions to decreased DAH365 were mortality days and total facility days after discharge from the index hospitalization (mortality days-TAVR: 34.7 ± 93.1 vs SAVR: 48.0 ± 108.8, difference in days -13.3 [95% CI -32.1, 5.5], P = .17; total facility days-TAVR: 27.9 ± 47.4 vs SAVR: 36.7 ± 48.9, difference in days -8.8 [95% CI -17.8, 0.1], P = .05). Mean DAH1825 was numerically but not statistically significantly higher in TAVR (TAVR: 1154.2 ± 659.0 vs SAVR: 1067.6 ± 697.3, difference in days 86.6 [95% CI -42.3, 215.6], P = .19). Landmark analysis showed no difference in DAH from years 1 to 5 (TAVR: 1040.4 ± 477.5 vs SAVR: 1022.9 ± 489.3, P = .74). CONCLUSIONS: In the U.S. CoreValve High Risk Trial linked to Medicare, high-risk patients undergoing TAVR spend an average of 27 additional DAH compared with SAVR in the first year after the procedure due to a shorter index LOS and the additive effect of fewer but nonsignificantly different mortality and total facility days after discharge from the index hospitalization compared with SAVR. After the first year, both groups spend a similar number of DAH. These results describe the postprocedural course of high-risk patients from a patient-centered perspective, which may guide expectations regarding longitudinal health care needs and inform shared decision-making.

Trends in management and outcomes of pulmonary embolism with a multidisciplinary response team.

Multidisciplinary pulmonary embolism (PE) response teams have garnered widespread adoption given the complexities of managing acute PE and provide a platform for assessment of trends in therapy and outcomes. We describe temporal trends in PE management and outcomes following the deployment of such a team. All consecutive patients managed by our multidisciplinary PE response team activated by the Emergency Department were included over a 5-year calendar period. We examined temporal trends in management and rates of a composite primary endpoint (all-cause-death, major bleeding, recurrent venous thromboembolism, and readmission) at 30 days and 6 months. We assessed 425 patients between 2015 and 2019. We observed an increase in PE acuity and use of systemic thrombolysis. The primary endpoint at 30 days decreased from 16.3% in 2015 to 7.1% in 2019 (adjusted rate ratio per period, 0.63; 95%CI, 0.47-0.84), driven by a decrease in the adjusted rate of major bleeding. Among 406 patients with complete follow-up, the adjusted rate ratio per year for the primary outcome at 6 months was 0.37 (95%CI, 0.19-0.71), driven by a decrease in all-cause mortality. We observed evidence of temporal changes in clinical presentation, therapeutic strategies, and outcomes for acute PE, in parallel to, but not necessarily because of, the implementation of a multidisciplinary response team. Over time, major bleeding, mortality and readmission rates decreased, despite an increase in PE risk category.

Characterizing the Accuracy of International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision Administrative Claims for Aortic Valve Disease.

BACKGROUND: Administrative claims for aortic stenosis (AS) regurgitation may be useful, but their accuracy and ability to identify individuals at risk for valve-related outcomes have not been well characterized. METHODS: Using echocardiographic (transthoracic echocardiogram [TTE]) reports linked to US Medicare claims, 2017 to 2018, the performance of candidate International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision claims to ascertain AS/aortic regurgitation was evaluated. The optimal performing algorithm was tested against outcomes at 1-year after TTE in a separate 100% sample of US Medicare claims, 2017 to 2019. RESULTS: Of those included in the derivation (N=5497, mean age 74.4±11.0 years, 49.7% female), any AS or aortic regurgitation was present in 24% and 38.8%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision code I35.0 for identification of any AS was 53.1% and 94.8%, respectively. Among those with an I35.0 code, 40.3% had severe AS. Claims were unable to distinguish disease severity (ie, severe versus nonsevere) or subtype (eg, bicuspid or rheumatic AS), and were insensitive and nonspecific for aortic regurgitation of any severity. Among all beneficiaries who received a TTE (N=4 033 844), adjusting for age, sex, and 27 comorbidities, those with an I35.0 code had a higher adjusted risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.33 [95% CI, 1.31-1.34]), heart failure hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.37 [95% CI, 1.34-1.41]), and aortic valve replacement (adjusted hazard ratio, 34.96 [95% CI, 33.74-36.22]). CONCLUSIONS: Among US Medicare beneficiaries receiving a TTE, International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision claims, though identifying a population at significant greater risk of valve-related outcomes, failed to identify nearly half of individuals with AS and were unable to distinguish disease severity or subtype. These results argue against the widespread use of International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision claims to screen for patients with AS and suggests the need for improved coding algorithms and alternative systems to extract TTE data for quality improvement and hospital benchmarking.

Outcomes of stroke events during transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: Despite improvements in the safety of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), ~4% of patients experience a procedure-related stroke. Understanding long-term health and healthcare implications of these events may motivate the development and adoption of preventative strategies.  Aims: We aimed to assess the association of TAVI-related ischaemic stroke with subsequent clinical outcomes and healthcare utilisation. METHODS: We used Medicare fee-for-service claims to identify patients who underwent their first TAVI between January 2012 and December 2017. Previously used ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM codes were used to identify TAVI-related ischaemic stroke. Among those with and without TAVI-related ischaemic stroke, we compared the risk of a composite endpoint that included all-cause mortality, acute myocardial infarction, and subsequent stroke using inverse probability treatment weighted Cox regression. We also performed a difference-in-difference analysis to compare 1-year Medicare expenditures and days spent at home during the first year after TAVI. RESULTS:  Among 129,628 primary TAVI patients, 5,549 (4.3%) had a procedure-related stroke. These patients were more likely to be female and have had prior stroke, peripheral vascular disease, ischaemic heart disease, or renal failure. After adjustment, TAVI-related ischaemic stroke was associated with a higher risk of the 1-year composite outcome (HR 1.67, 95% CI: 1.56-1.78), higher 1-year Medicare expenditures (difference $9,245 [standard error 790], p<0.001), and fewer days at home during the first year (difference 16 days [standard error 1], p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among Medicare beneficiaries undergoing TAVI, procedure-related ischaemic stroke was associated with worse outcomes, increased Medicare expenditures, and less time spent at home. Procedure-related ischaemic stroke during TAVI remains a critically important and potentially preventable source of patient mortality, morbidity and healthcare utilisation.

Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2022 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association.

BACKGROUND: The American Heart Association, in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular risk factors, including core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, diet, and weight) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure, and glucose control) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The Statistical Update presents the latest data on a range of major clinical heart and circulatory disease conditions (including stroke, congenital heart disease, rhythm disorders, subclinical atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, heart failure, valvular disease, venous disease, and peripheral artery disease) and the associated outcomes (including quality of care, procedures, and economic costs). METHODS: The American Heart Association, through its Statistics Committee, continuously monitors and evaluates sources of data on heart disease and stroke in the United States to provide the most current information available in the annual Statistical Update. The 2022 Statistical Update is the product of a full year's worth of effort by dedicated volunteer clinicians and scientists, committed government professionals, and American Heart Association staff members. This year's edition includes data on the monitoring and benefits of cardiovascular health in the population and an enhanced focus on social determinants of health, adverse pregnancy outcomes, vascular contributions to brain health, and the global burden of cardiovascular disease and healthy life expectancy. RESULTS: Each of the chapters in the Statistical Update focuses on a different topic related to heart disease and stroke statistics. CONCLUSIONS: The Statistical Update represents a critical resource for the lay public, policymakers, media professionals, clinicians, health care administrators, researchers, health advocates, and others seeking the best available data on these factors and conditions.