A Geriatric Approach to Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in Older Adults, Part II: A JACC: Advances Expert Panel

We review a comprehensive risk assessment approach for percutaneous coronary interventions in older adults and highlight the relevance of geriatric syndromes within that broader perspective to optimize patient-centered outcomes in interventional cardiology practice. Reflecting the influence of geriatric principles in older adults undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions, we propose a "geriatric" heart team to incorporate the expertise of geriatric specialists in addition to the traditional heart team members, facilitate uptake of the geriatric risk assessment into the preprocedural risk assessment, and address ways to mitigate these geriatric risks. We also address goals of care in older adults, highlighting common priorities that can impact shared decision making among older patients, as well as frequently encountered pharmacotherapeutic considerations in the older adult population. Finally, we clarify gaps in current knowledge and describe crucial areas for future investigation.

Assessment and Management of Older Adults Undergoing PCI, Part 1: A JACC: Advances Expert Panel

As the population ages, older adults represent an increasing proportion of patients referred to the cardiac catheterization laboratory. Older adults are the highest-risk group for morbidity and mortality, particularly after complex, high-risk percutaneous coronary interventions. Structured risk assessment plays a key role in differentiating patients who are likely to derive net benefit vs those who have disproportionate risks for harm. Conventional risk assessment tools from national cardiovascular societies typically rely on 3 pillars: 1) cardiovascular risk; 2) physiologic and hemodynamic risk; and 3) anatomic and procedural risks. We propose adding a fourth pillar: geriatric syndromes, as geriatric domains can supersede all other aspects of risk.

Impact of Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair Availability on Volume and Outcomes of Surgical Repair

BACKGROUND

The impact of transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) on national surgical mitral valve repair (MVr) volume and outcomes is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to assess the impact of TEER availability on MVr volumes and outcomes for degenerative mitral regurgitation.

METHODS

MVr volume, 30-day and 5-year outcomes, including mortality, heart failure rehospitalization and mitral valve reintervention, were obtained from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons database linked with Medicare administrative claims and were compared within TEER centers before and after the first institutional TEER procedure. A difference-in-difference approach comparing parallel trends in coronary artery bypass grafting outcomes was used to account for temporal improvements in perioperative care.

RESULTS

From July 2011 through December 2018, 13,959 patients underwent MVr at 278 institutions, which became TEER-capable during the study period. There was no significant change in median annualized institutional MVr volume before (32 [IQR: 17-54]) vs after (29 [IQR: 16-54]) the first TEER (P = 0.06). However, higher-risk (Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality ≥2%) MVr procedures declined over the study period (P < 0.001 for trend). The introduction of TEER was associated with reduced risk-adjusted odds of mortality after MVr at 30 days (adjusted OR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.54-0.99) and over 5 years (adjusted HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.66-0.86). These improvements in 30-day and 5-year mortality were significantly greater than equivalent trends in coronary artery bypass grafting.

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of TEER has not significantly changed overall MVr case volumes for degenerative mitral regurgitation but is associated with a decrease in higher-risk surgical operations and improved 30-day and 5-year outcomes within institutions adopting the technology.

Readmission rates and risk factors for readmission after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with end-stage renal disease

Objectives

We sought to examine readmission rates and predictors of hospital readmission following TAVR in patients with ESRD.

Background

End-stage renal disease (ESRD) is associated with poor outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

Methods

We assessed index hospitalizations for TAVR from the National Readmissions Database from 2017 to 2018 and used propensity scores to match those with and without ESRD. We compared 90-day readmission for any cause or cardiovascular cause. Length of stay (LOS), mortality, and cost were assessed for index hospitalizations and 90-day readmissions. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of 90-day readmission.

Results

We identified 49,172 index hospitalizations for TAVR, including 1,219 patients with ESRD (2.5%). Patient with ESRD had higher rates of all-cause readmission (34.4% vs. 19.2%, HR 1.96, 95% CI 1.68–2.30, p<0.001) and cardiovascular readmission (13.2% vs. 7.7%, HR 1.85, 95% CI 1.44–2.38, p<0.001) at 90 days. During index hospitalization, patients with ESRD had longer length of stay (mean difference 1.9 days), increased hospital cost (mean difference $42,915), and increased in-hospital mortality (2.6% vs. 0.9%). Among those readmitted within 90 days, patients with ESRD had longer LOS and increased hospital charge, but similar in-hospital mortality. Diabetes (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.31–2.64) and chronic pulmonary disease (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.04–2.18) were independently associated with higher odds of 90-day readmission in patients with ESRD.

Conclusion

Patients with ESRD undergoing TAVR have higher mortality and increased cost associated with their index hospitalization and are at increased risk of readmission within 90 days following TAVR.

Measurement of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Levels in Primary and Secondary Prevention Patients: Insights From the PALM Registry

Background

The 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guideline on the Treatment of Blood Cholesterol to Reduce Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Risk in Adults recommended testing low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) to identify untreated patients with LDL‐C ≥190 mg/dL, assess lipid‐lowering therapy adherence, and consider nonstatin therapy. We sought to determine whether clinician lipid testing practices were consistent with these guidelines.

Methods and Results

The PALM (Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management) registry enrolled primary and secondary prevention patients from 140 US cardiology, endocrinology, and primary care offices in 2015 and captured demographic data, lipid treatment history, and the highest LDL‐C level in the past 2 years. Core laboratory lipid levels were drawn at enrollment. Among 7627 patients, 2787 (36.5%) had no LDL‐C levels measured in the 2 years before enrollment. Patients without chart‐documented LDL‐C levels were more often women, nonwhite, uninsured, and non–college graduates (all P<0.01). Patients without prior lipid testing were less likely to receive statin treatment (72.6% versus 76.0%; P=0.0034), a high‐intensity statin (21.5% versus 24.3%; P=0.016), nonstatin lipid‐lowering therapy (24.8% versus 27.3%; P=0.037), and had higher core laboratory LDL‐C levels at enrollment (median 97 versus 92 mg/dL; P<0.0001) than patients with prior LDL‐C testing. Of 166 individuals with core laboratory LDL‐C levels ≥190 mg/dL, 36.1% had no LDL‐C measurement in the prior 2 years, and 57.2% were not on a statin at the time of enrollment.

Conclusions

In routine clinical practice, LDL‐C testing is associated with higher‐intensity lipid‐lowering treatment and lower achieved LDL‐C levels.