RESUMO
BACKGROUND: It is unclear how the type of an atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) event potentially influences patients' likelihood of smoking cessation. METHODS: Using 2013 to 2018 data from the US based National Cardiovascular Data Registry Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence outpatient cardiac registry, we identified patients who were current smokers at a clinic visit and followed them over time for a subsequent ASCVD event. Self-reported smoking status was assessed at each consecutive visit and used to determine smoking cessation after each interim ASCVD event (myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass graft, stroke/transient ischemic attack, peripheral artery disease). We constructed separate multivariable Cox models with nonproportional hazards to examine the association of each interim ASCVD event with smoking cessation, compared with not having an interim ASCVD event. We estimated the relative association of ASCVD event type with smoking cessation using contrast tests. Analyses were stratified by presence versus absence of ASCVD at baseline. RESULTS: Across 530 cardiology practices, we identified 1 933 283 current smokers (mean age 62±15, male 54%, ASCVD at baseline 50%). Among the 322 743 patients who had an interim ASCVD event and were still smoking, 41 336 (12.8%) quit smoking by their first subsequent clinic visit, which was higher among those with baseline ASCVD (13.4%) as compared with those without baseline ASCVD (11.5%). Each type of ASCVD event was associated with an increased likelihood of smoking. Patients who had an myocardial infarction, underwent coronary artery bypass graft (hazard ratio, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.55-1.65]), or had a stroke or transient ischemic attack were more likely to quit smoking as compared with those who underwent elective percutaneous coronary intervention or had a new diagnosis of peripheral artery disease (hazard ratio, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.17-1.22]). CONCLUSIONS: Only 13% of patients reported smoking cessation after an ASCVD event, with the type of event being associated with the likelihood of smoking cessation, prompting the need for patient-centered interventions.
Assuntos
Aterosclerose , Doenças Cardiovasculares , Ataque Isquêmico Transitório , Infarto do Miocárdio , Doença Arterial Periférica , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar , Acidente Vascular Cerebral , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Pacientes Ambulatoriais , Ataque Isquêmico Transitório/diagnóstico , Ataque Isquêmico Transitório/epidemiologia , Ataque Isquêmico Transitório/terapia , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/diagnóstico , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/epidemiologia , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/terapia , Infarto do Miocárdio/diagnóstico , Infarto do Miocárdio/epidemiologia , Infarto do Miocárdio/terapia , Doença Arterial Periférica/diagnóstico , Doença Arterial Periférica/epidemiologia , Doença Arterial Periférica/terapia , Sistema de Registros , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
Patients with normal-flow low-gradient (NFLG) severe aortic stenosis present both diagnostic and management challenges, with debate about the whether this represents true severe stenosis and the need for valve replacement. Studies exploring the natural history without intervention have shown similar outcomes of patients with NFLG severe aortic stenosis to those with moderate aortic stenosis and better outcomes after valve replacement than those with low-flow low-gradient severe aortic stenosis. Most studies (all observational) have shown that aortic valve replacement was associated with a survival benefit vs surveillance. Based on available data, the European Society of Cardiology/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery guidelines and European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging/American Society of Echocardiography suggest that these patients are more likely to have moderate aortic stenosis. This clinical entity is not mentioned in the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines. Here we review the definition of NFLG severe aortic stenosis, potential diagnostic algorithms and points of error, the data supporting different management strategies, and the differing guidelines and outline the unanswered questions in the diagnosis and management of these challenging patients.
Assuntos
Estenose da Valva Aórtica , Valva Aórtica , Implante de Prótese de Valva Cardíaca , Hemodinâmica , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Humanos , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagem , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/fisiopatologia , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/terapia , Europa (Continente) , Estados Unidos , Valva Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagem , Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Valva Aórtica/fisiopatologia , Implante de Prótese de Valva Cardíaca/efeitos adversos , Fatores de Risco , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The ISCHEMIA trial found that patients with chronic coronary disease randomized to invasive strategy had better health status than those randomized to conservative strategy. It is unclear how best to translate these population-level results to individual patients. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to identify patient characteristics associated with health status from invasive and conservative strategies, and develop a prediction algorithm for shared decision-making. METHODS: One-year disease-specific health status was assessed in ISCHEMIA with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) Summary Score (SAQ SS) and Angina Frequency, Physical Limitations (PL), and Quality of Life (QL) domains (range 0-100, higher = less angina/better health status). RESULTS: Among 4,617 patients from 320 sites in 37 countries, mean SAQ SS was 74.1 ± 18.9 at baseline and 85.7 ± 15.6 at 1 year. Lower baseline SAQ SS and younger age were associated with better 1-year health status with invasive strategy (P interaction = 0.009 and P interaction = 0.004, respectively). For the individual domains, there were significant treatment interactions for baseline SAQ score (Angina Frequency, PL), age (PL, QL), anterior ischemia (PL), and number of baseline antianginal medications (QL), with more benefit of invasive in patients with worse baseline health status, younger age, anterior ischemia, and on more antianginal medications. Parsimonious prediction models were developed for 1-year SAQ domains with invasive or conservative strategies to support shared decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: In the management of chronic coronary disease, individual patient characteristics are associated with 1-year health status, with younger age and poorer angina-related health status showing greater benefit from invasive management. This prediction algorithm can support the translation of the ISCHEMIA trial results to individual patients. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches [ISCHEMIA]; NCT01471522).
Assuntos
Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Doença das Coronárias , Humanos , Qualidade de Vida , Tratamento Conservador , Nível de Saúde , Angina Pectoris , Doença Crônica , Isquemia , Resultado do Tratamento , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/terapiaAssuntos
Estenose da Valva Aórtica , Próteses Valvulares Cardíacas , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter , Humanos , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagem , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Valva Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagem , Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Whether initial invasive management in older vs younger adults with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia improves health status or clinical outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to examine the impact of age on health status and clinical outcomes with invasive vs conservative management in the ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial. METHODS: One-year angina-specific health status was assessed with the 7-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) (score range 0-100; higher scores indicate better health status). Cox proportional hazards models estimated the treatment effect of invasive vs conservative management as a function of age on the composite clinical outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for resuscitated cardiac arrest, unstable angina, or heart failure. RESULTS: Among 4,617 participants, 2,239 (48.5%) were aged <65 years, 1,713 (37.1%) were aged 65 to 74 years, and 665 (14.4%) were aged ≥75 years. Baseline SAQ summary scores were lower in participants aged <65 years. Fully adjusted differences in 1-year SAQ summary scores (invasive minus conservative) were 4.90 (95% CI: 3.56-6.24) at age 55 years, 3.48 (95% CI: 2.40-4.57) at age 65 years, and 2.13 (95% CI: 0.75-3.51) at age 75 years (Pinteraction = 0.008). Improvement in SAQ Angina Frequency was less dependent on age (Pinteraction = 0.08). There were no age differences between invasive vs conservative management on the composite clinical outcome (Pinteraction = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: Older patients with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia had consistent improvement in angina frequency but less improvement in angina-related health status with invasive management compared with younger patients. Invasive management was not associated with improved clinical outcomes in older or younger patients. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches [ISCHEMIA]; NCT01471522).