Predicting Residual Angina After Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights from the OPEN‐CTO Registry

Background

Given that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of a chronic total occlusion (CTO) is indicated primarily for symptom relief, identifying patients most likely to benefit is critically important for patient selection and shared decision‐making. Therefore, we identified factors associated with residual angina frequency after CTO PCI and developed a model to predict postprocedure anginal burden.

Methods and Results

Among patients in the OPEN‐CTO (Outcomes, Patient Health Status, and Efficiency in Chronic Total Occlusion Hybrid Procedures) registry, we evaluated the association between patient characteristics and residual angina frequency at 6 months, as assessed by the Seattle Angina Questionnaire Angina Frequency Scale. We then constructed a prediction model for angina status after CTO PCI using ordinal regression. Among 901 patients undergoing CTO PCI, 28% had no angina, 31% had monthly angina, 30% had weekly angina, and 12% had daily angina at baseline. Six months later, 53% of patients had a ≥20‐point increase in Seattle Angina Questionnaire Angina Frequency Scale score. The final model to predict residual angina after CTO PCI included baseline angina frequency, baseline nitroglycerin use frequency, dyspnea symptoms, depressive symptoms, number of antianginal medications, PCI indication, and presence of multiple CTO lesions and had a C index of 0.78. Baseline angina frequency and nitroglycerin use frequency explained 71% of the predictive power of the model, and the relationship between model components and angina improvement at 6 months varied by baseline angina status.

Conclusions

A 7‐component OPEN‐AP (OPEN‐CTO Angina Prediction) score can predict angina improvement and residual angina after CTO PCI using variables commonly available before intervention. These findings have implications for appropriate patient selection and counseling for CTO PCI.

Frailty in patients undergoing percutaneous left atrial appendage closure

BACKGROUND

Frailty is associated with significant morbidity and mortality in older adults. Whether frailty predicts adverse outcomes after percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine the association between frailty and clinical outcomes after percutaneous LAAC.

METHODS

We identified patients 65 years and older in Medicare fee-for-service claims who underwent LAAC between October 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019. Patients were identified as frail on the basis of the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS), a validated frailty measure centered on health resource utilization, with the cohort stratified into low (<5), intermediate (5-15), and high (>15) risk groups.

RESULTS

Of the 21,787 patients who underwent LAAC, 10,740 (49.3%) were considered frail (HFRS >5), including 3441 (15.8%) in the high-risk group. The mortality rate (up to 1095 days) were 16.1% in the low-risk group, 26.7% in the intermediate-risk group, and 41.1% in the high-risk group (P < .001). After adjusting for age, sex, and comorbidities, HFRS >15 (compared with HFRS <5) was associated with a higher risk of long hospital stay (odds ratio [OR] 8.29; 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.94-11.57), 30-day readmission (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.58-2.05), 30-day mortality (OR 5.68, 95% CI 3.40-9.40), and 1-year mortality (OR 2.83, 95% CI 2.39-3.35). In restricted cubic spline models, the adjusted OR for all outcomes monotonically increased with increasing HFRS.

CONCLUSION

Frailty is common in patients undergoing LAAC and is associated with increased risks of long hospital stay, readmissions, and short-term mortality.

Outcomes Associated With Peripheral Artery Disease in Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock

BACKGROUND

Mortality rates for patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and cardiogenic shock (CS) remain high despite advances in revascularization strategies and mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to elucidate the association between comorbid lower extremity peripheral artery disease (PAD) and outcomes in CS and AMI.

METHODS

PAD status was defined in Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized with CS and AMI from October 1, 2015 to June 30, 2018. Primary outcomes ascertained through December 31, 2018 included in- and out-of-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included bleeding, amputation, stroke, and lower extremity revascularization. Multivariable regression models with adjustment for confounders were used to estimate risk. Subgroup analyses included patients treated with MCS and those who underwent coronary revascularization.

RESULTS

Among 71,690 patients, 5.9% (N = 4,259) had PAD. Mean age was 77.8 ± 7.9 years, 58.7% were male, and 84.3% were White. Cumulative in-hospital mortality was 47.2%, with greater risk among those with PAD (56.3% vs 46.6% without PAD; adjusted OR: 1.50; 95% CI: 1.40-1.59). PAD patients also had greater risk of in-hospital amputation (1.6% vs 0.2%; adjusted OR: 7.0; 95% CI: 5.26-9.37) and out-of-hospital mortality (67.9% vs 40.7%; adjusted HR: 1.78; 95% CI: 1.67-1.90). MCS was less frequently utilized in PAD patients (21.5% vs 38.6% without PAD; P < 0.001) and was associated with higher mortality, need for lower extremity revascularization, and amputation risk. Findings were consistent in patients who underwent coronary revascularization.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients presenting with AMI and CS, PAD was associated with worse limb outcomes and survival. In addition to lower MCS utilization rates, those with PAD who received MCS had increased mortality, lower extremity revascularization, and amputation rates.

Potential Impact of the 2019 ACC/AHA Guidelines on the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease Recommendations on the Inappropriate Routine Use of Aspirin and Aspirin Use Without a Recommended Indication for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Cardiology Practices: Insights From the NCDR PINNACLE Registry

BACKGROUND

Aspirin is recommended in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease for secondary prevention. In patients without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and not at high 10-year risk, there is no evidence aspirin reduces adverse cardiovascular events and it could increase bleeding. The 2019 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines on Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease state that aspirin may be considered for primary prevention (class IIb) in patients 40 to 70 years that are at higher risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and that routine use of aspirin should be avoided (class III:Harm) for patients >70 years. We examined the frequency of patients on aspirin for primary prevention that would have been considered unindicated or potentially harmful per the recent guideline where aspirin discontinuation may be beneficial.

METHODS

To assess the potential impact, within the National Cardiovascular Disease Registry Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence Registry, we assessed 855 366 patients from 400 practices with encounters between January 1, 2018 and March 31, 2019, that were receiving aspirin for primary prevention. We defined inappropriate use as the use of aspirin in patients <40 or >70 years and use without a recommended indication as use of aspirin in patients 40 to 70 years with low, borderline, or intermediate 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk. Frequency of inappropriate use and use without a recommended indication were calculated and practice-level variation was evaluated using the median rate ratio.

RESULTS

Inappropriate use occurred in 27.6% (193 674/701 975) and use without a recommended indication in 26.0% (31 810/122 507) with significant practice-level variation in inappropriate use (predicted median practice-level rate 33.5%, interquartile range, 24.1% to 40.8%; median rate ratio, 1.71 [95% CI, 1.67-1.76]).

CONCLUSIONS

Immediately before the 2019 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines on Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease, over one-fourth of patients in this national registry were receiving aspirin for primary prevention inappropriately or without a recommended indication with significant practice-level variation. These findings help to determine the potential impact of guideline recommendations on contemporary use of aspirin for primary prevention.

Very early versus early referral for ablation among young patients for newly diagnosed paroxysmal atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Catheter ablation (CA) has emerged as an effective therapy for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, however it is unclear whether proceeding expeditiously to CA improves clinical outcomes in a real-world population. This study compares outcomes of catheter ablation for new atrial fibrillation (AF) within 6 months of diagnosis (very early) 6 to 12 months after diagnosis (early) and 12 to 24 months after diagnosis (later).

METHODS

A large nationally-representative sample of patients ages 18 to 64 who underwent CA from January 2011 to June 2019 was studied using the IBM MarketScan® Database. The primary outcome was a composite of healthcare utilization over the following 24 months. Propensity score-matching was used to match patients in each cohort. Risk difference in outcomes were compared between matched patients.

RESULTS

2,631 patients were identified post-matching, with 1,649 in the very early cohort and 982 in the early cohort. The very early referral group was less likely to experience the primary composite outcome post-ablation (Absolute risk difference [ARD]: -3.9%; 95% Confidence interval [CI]: -5.8%, -2.0%), with the difference driven by fewer cardioversions (ARD: -2.9%, 95% CI: -5.3%, -0.5%) and outpatient visits (ARD: -6.6%, 95% CI: -10.5%, -2.7%). There was no difference in outcomes between early and later referral groups, with only very early referral showing decreased healthcare utilization.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who underwent ablation within 6 months of diagnosis had lower healthcare utilization in the ensuing 24 months, driven by fewer outpatient visits and cardioversions, supporting expeditious referral for ablation for symptomatic AF. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

The Outcomes of Percutaneous revascularizaTIon for Management of sUrgically ineligible patients with Multivessel or left main coronary artery disease (OPTIMUM) registry: Rationale and design

BACKGROUND

Guidelines endorse coronary artery bypass as the preferred revascularization strategy for patients with left main and/or multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). However, many patients are deemed excessively high risk for surgery after Heart Team evaluation. No prospective studies have examined contemporary treatment patterns, rationale for surgical decision-making, completeness of revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and outcomes in this high-risk population with advanced CAD.

METHODS

We designed the Outcomes of Percutaneous RevascularizaTIon for Management of SUrgically Ineligible Patients with Multivessel or Left Main Coronary Artery Disease (OPTIMUM) registry, a prospective, multicenter study of patients with "surgical anatomy" determined to be at prohibitive risk for bypass surgery. The primary outcome is comparison of observed to predicted 30-day mortality, with secondary outcomes of patient-reported health status and the association between completeness of revascularization and clinical outcomes. Patient characteristics driving surgical risk determinations will be reported, and peri-operative risk will be assessed using validated scoring methods. Angiograms will be assessed by an independent core laboratory, and clinical events will be adjudicated.

RESULTS

Clinical outcomes assessments will include 30-day and 1-year cardiovascular events, health status at 1, 6 and 12-months, and 5-year mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

OPTIMUM is the first prospective, multicenter study to examine treatment strategies and outcomes among multivessel CAD patients deemed ineligible for surgical revascularization after Heart Team assessment. This registry will provide unique insights into the clinical decision-making, revascularization practices, safety, effectiveness, and health status outcomes in this high-risk population.

Rural-Urban Disparities in Outcomes of Myocardial Infarction, Heart Failure, and Stroke in the United States

BACKGROUND

U.S. policy efforts have focused on reducing rural-urban health inequities. However, it is unclear whether gaps in care and outcomes remain among older adults with acute cardiovascular conditions.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to evaluate rural-urban differences in procedural care and mortality for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF), and ischemic stroke.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cross-sectional study of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged ≥65 years with acute cardiovascular conditions from 2016 to 2018. Cox proportional hazards models with random hospital intercepts were fit to examine the association of presenting to a rural (vs urban) hospital and 30- and 90-day patient-level mortality.

RESULTS

There were 2,182,903 Medicare patients hospitalized with AMI, HF, or ischemic stroke from 2016 to 2018. Patients with AMI were less likely to undergo cardiac catherization (49.7% vs 63.6%, P < 0.001), percutaneous coronary intervention (42.1% vs 45.7%, P < 0.001) or coronary artery bypass graft (9.0% vs 10.2%, P < 0.001) within 30 days at rural versus urban hospitals. Thrombolysis rates (3.1% vs 10.1%, P < 0.001) and endovascular therapy (1.8% vs 3.6%, P < 0.001) for ischemic stroke were lower at rural hospitals. After adjustment for demographics and clinical comorbidities, the 30-day mortality HR was significantly higher among patients presenting to rural hospitals for AMI (HR: 1.10, 95% CI: 1.08 to 1.12), HF (HR: 1.15; 95% CI: 1.13 to 1.16), and ischemic stroke (HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.18 to 1.22), with similar patterns at 90 days. These differences were most pronounced for the subset of critical access hospitals that serve remote, rural areas.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical, public health, and policy efforts are needed to improve rural-urban gaps in care and outcomes for acute cardiovascular conditions.

Estimation of DAPT Study Treatment Effects in Contemporary Clinical Practice: Findings From the EXTEND-DAPT Study

BACKGROUND

Differences in patient characteristics, changes in treatment algorithms, and advances in medical technology could each influence the applicability of older randomized trial results to contemporary clinical practice. The DAPT Study (Dual Antiplatelet Therapy) found that longer-duration DAPT decreased ischemic events at the expense of greater bleeding, but subsequent evolution in stent technology and clinical practice may attenuate the benefit of prolonged DAPT in a contemporary population. We evaluated whether the DAPT Study population is different from a contemporary population of US patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention and estimated the treatment effect of extended-duration antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention in this more contemporary cohort.

METHODS

We compared the characteristics of drug-eluting stent-treated patients randomly assigned in the DAPT Study to a sample of more contemporary drug-eluting stent-treated patients in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry from July 2016 to June 2017. After linking trial and registry data, we used inverse-odds of trial participation weighting to account for patient and procedural characteristics and estimated a contemporary real-world treatment effect of 30 versus 12 months of DAPT after coronary stent procedures.

RESULTS

The US drug-eluting stent-treated trial cohort included 8864 DAPT Study patients, and the registry cohort included 568 540 patients. Compared with the trial population, registry patients had more comorbidities and were more likely to present with myocardial infarction and receive 2nd-generation drug-eluting stents. After reweighting trial results to represent the registry population, there was no longer a significant effect of prolonged DAPT on reducing stent thrombosis (reweighted treatment effect: -0.40 [95% CI, -0.99% to 0.15%]), major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (reweighted treatment effect, -0.52 [95% CI, -2.62% to 1.03%]), or myocardial infarction (reweighted treatment effect, -0.97% [95% CI, -2.75% to 0.18%]), but the increase in bleeding with prolonged DAPT persisted (reweighted treatment effect, 2.42% [95% CI, 0.79% to 3.91%]).

CONCLUSIONS

The differences between the patients and devices used in contemporary clinical practice compared with the DAPT Study were associated with the attenuation of benefits and greater harms attributable to prolonged DAPT duration. These findings limit the applicability of the average treatment effects from the DAPT Study in modern clinical practice.

Cholesterol Efflux Capacity and Its Association With Adverse Cardiovascular Events: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Serum high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels are inversely associated with cardiovascular disease events. Yet, emerging evidence suggests that it is the functional properties of HDL, in particular, reverse cholesterol transport, which is a key protective mechanism mediating cholesterol removal from macrophage cells and reducing plaque lipid content. Cholesterol efflux capacity (CEC) measures the capacity of HDL to perform this function. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to explore the association of CEC and adverse cardiovascular events.

Methods: A comprehensive literature review of Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science Core Collection from inception to September 2019 was performed for all studies that examined the association between CEC and cardiovascular outcomes. The primary outcome was adverse cardiovascular events, which were inclusive of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) or mortality.

Results: A total of 20 trials were included. Compared with low CEC levels, high CEC levels were associated with a 37% lower risk of adverse cardiovascular events (crude RR = 0.63; 95% CI, 0.52–0.76; P < 0.00001). Every SD increase of CEC was associated with a 20% lower risk of adverse cardiovascular events (HR = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.66–0.97; P = 0.02). The association remained significant after adjusting for cardiovascular risk factors, medications, and HDL-C levels (HR = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.63–0.91; P = 0.004). A significant CEC-endpoint relationship was observed (P = 0.024) such that for every 0.1 unit increase in CEC, there was a 5% reduced risk for adverse cardiovascular events (RR = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.91–0.99).

Conclusions: Higher CEC is associated with lower adverse cardiovascular outcomes. These findings warrant further research on whether CEC is merely a biomarker or a mechanism that could be targeted as a pharmacologic intervention for improving clinical outcomes.

PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42020146681; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/.

Association of Frailty With Treatment Selection and Long-Term Outcomes Among Patients With Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia

Background

The optimal treatment strategy for patients with chronic limb‐threatening ischemia (CLTI) is often unclear. Frailty has emerged as an important factor that can identify patients at greater risk of poor outcomes and guide treatment selection, but few studies have explored its utility among the CLTI population. We examine the association of a health record‐based frailty measure with treatment choice and long‐term outcomes among patients hospitalized with CLTI.

Methods and Results

We included patients aged >65 years hospitalized with CLTI in the Medicare Provider Analysis and Review data set between October 1, 2009 and September 30, 2015. The primary exposure was frailty, defined by the Claims‐based Frailty Indicator. Baseline frailty status and revascularization choice were examined using logistic regression. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to determine the association between frailty and death or amputation, stratifying by treatment strategy. Of 85 060 patients, 35 484 (42%) were classified as frail. Frail patients had lower likelihood of revascularization (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.75‒0.82). Among those revascularized, frailty was associated with lower likelihood of surgical versus endovascular treatment (adjusted OR, 0.76; CI, 0.72‒0.81). Frail patients experienced increased risk of amputation or death, regardless of revascularization status (revascularized: adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.34; CI, 1.30‒1.38; non‐revascularized: adjusted HR, 1.22; CI, 1.17‒1.27). Among those revascularized, frailty was independently associated with amputation or death irrespective of revascularization strategy (surgical: adjusted HR, 1.36; CI, 1.31‒1.42; endovascular: aHR, 1.29; CI, 1.243‒1.35).

Conclusions

Among patients hospitalized with CLTI, frailty is an important independent predictor of revascularization strategy and longitudinal adverse outcomes.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Hypertension Prevalence, Awareness, Treatment, and Control in the United States, 2013 to 2018

[Figure: see text].