Patient Outcomes by Ventricular Systolic and Diastolic Function

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular dysfunction is characterized by systolic and diastolic parameters, leading to heart failure (HF) with reduced or preserved ejection fraction (EF), respectively. The goal of this study is to examine the impact of left ventricular systolic and diastolic dysfunction (DD) on patient outcomes.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Two cohorts were used in this analysis: Cohort A included 136 455 patients with EF ≥50%, stratified by the presence and grade of DD. Cohort B included 16 850 patients with EF <50%, stratified by EF quartiles. Patients were followed to the end points of all-cause death and cardiovascular, HF, or cardiac arrest hospitalizations. Over a median follow-up of 3.42 years, 23 946 (16%) patients died and 31 113 (20%), 13 305 (9%), and 1269 (1%) were hospitalized for cardiovascular, HF, or cardiac arrest causes, respectively. With adjustment for comorbidities, the risk of all-cause mortality and of cardiovascular and HF hospitalizations increased steadily with increasing grade of DD in patients with normal EF, and even more so in patients with worsening EF. The risk of hospitalization for cardiac arrest in patients with grade III DD, however, was comparable to that of patients with EF <25% (hazard ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.98-1.01]) and worse than that of patients in better EF quartiles.

CONCLUSIONS

Although systolic dysfunction is associated with a greater risk of overall death and HF hospitalizations than DD, the risk of cardiac arrest in patients with grade II and III DD is comparable to that of patients with moderate and severe systolic dysfunction, respectively. Future studies are needed to examine treatment strategies than can improve these outcomes.

Association of pre-left ventricular assist device defibrillator shocks for ventricular arrhythmia with clinical outcomes after left ventricular assist device implantation

Background

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillation (ICD) shocks after left ventricular assist device therapy (LVAD) are associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Little is known about the association of pre-LVAD ICD shocks on post-LVAD clinical outcomes and whether LVAD therapy affects the prevalence of ICD shocks.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to determine whether pre-LVAD ICD shocks are associated with adverse clinical outcomes post-LVAD and to compare the prevalence of ICD shocks before and after LVAD therapy.

Methods

Patients 18 years or older with continuous-flow LVADs and ICDs were retrospectively identified within the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center system from 2006-2020. We analyzed the association between appropriate ICD shocks within 1 year pre-LVAD with a primary composite outcome of death, stroke, and pump thrombosis and secondary outcomes of post-LVAD ICD shocks and ICD shock hospitalizations.

Results

Among 309 individuals, average age was 57 ± 12 years, 87% were male, 80% had ischemic cardiomyopathy, and 42% were bridge to transplantation. Seventy-one patients (23%) experienced pre-LVAD shocks, and 69 (22%) experienced post-LVAD shocks. The overall prevalence of shocks pre-LVAD and post-LVAD were not different. Pre-LVAD ICD shocks were not associated with the composite outcome. Pre-LVAD ICD shocks were found to predict post-LVAD shocks (hazard ratio [HR] 5.7; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.42-9.48; P <.0001) and hospitalizations related to ICD shocks from ventricular arrhythmia (HR 10.34; 95% CI 4.1-25.7; P <.0001).

Conclusion

Pre-LVAD ICD shocks predicted post-LVAD ICD shocks and hospitalizations but were not associated with the composite outcome of death, pump thrombosis, or stroke at 1 year. The prevalence of appropriate ICD shocks was similar before and after LVAD implantation in the entire cohort.

A Blueprint for Productive Maintenance of Certification, But Is the American Board of Internal Medicine up to the Challenge?

The future of the American Board of Internal Medicine Maintenance of Certification (MOC) program is at a crossroads. The current MOC program lacks a clear visible mission, adds to modern health care’s onerous bureaucracy, and thus pulls physicians from the most important humanistic aspects of their profession. The aim of the MOC program should be to promote the best patient care by ensuring certified physicians maintain core skills through continuous education and evaluation. The program should focus on education and be designed with the rigorous obligations of practicing physicians in mind. Moving forward, the American Board of Internal Medicine should cocreate MOC with the physician community and apply innovative adult education techniques. Over time, data-driven methods and member feedback should be used to provide continuous program improvement. This review describes the origins of the current state of MOC, explores its evidence base, provides examples of model programs for the maintenance of complex professional skills, and outlines guiding principles for the future of MOC.

Long-Term Outcome in High-Risk Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy After Primary Prevention Defibrillator Implants

Background:

The implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) is effective for preventing sudden death in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. However, data on performance and complications of implanted ICDs over particularly long time periods to inform clinical practice is presently incomplete.

Methods:

The study cohort comprises 217 consecutive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy patients with primary prevention ICDs implanted before 2008 and followed for ≥10 years (mean 12±4; range to 31).

Results:

Patients were 38±17 years at implant and 45 (21%) experienced appropriate interventions terminating ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation. The majority of ICD discharges occurred ≥5 years after implant (29 patients; 64%), including ≥10 years in 16 patients (36%). Initial device therapy increased in frequency from 2.3% of patients at <1 year to 8.5% of patients at ≥10-years after implant ( P =0.005). Inappropriate ICD shocks in 39 patients occurred most commonly <5 years after implant (54%) and decreased in frequency with increasing time from implant (from 9.7% of patients at <5 years to 3.8% at ≥10 years, P =0.02). Other major device complications including infection and lead fractures and dislodgement occurred in 27 patients (12%) but did not increase in frequency over follow-up after implant ( P =0.47). There were no arrhythmic sudden death events among the 217 patients with ICD.

Conclusions:

In hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, after a primary prevention implant, ICD therapy often followed prolonged periods of device dormancy and increased progressively in frequency over time, including one-third of patients with initial therapy after 5 to 9 years, and an additional one-third of patients at ≥10 years. Frequency of inappropriate shocks decreased over follow-up, likely reflecting standard changes in device programming, while occurrence of device complications, such as lead fractures/infection, did not increase during follow-up.

Safety and Efficacy of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease and Atrial Fibrillation

Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) commonly have impaired renal function. The safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease has not been fully elucidated. This study evaluated and compared the safety outcomes of DOACs versus warfarin in patients with nonvalvular AF and concomitant CKD. Patients in our health system with AF prescribed oral anticoagulants during 2010 to 2017 were identified. All-cause mortality, bleeding and hemorrhagic, and ischemic stroke were evaluated based on degree of renal impairment and method of anticoagulation. There were 21,733 patients with a CHA₂DS₂-VASc score of ≥2 included in this analysis. Compared with warfarin, DOAC use in patients with impaired renal function was associated with lower risk of mortality with a hazard ratio (HR): 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70 to 0.84, p value <0.001) in patients with eGFR >60, HR 0.74 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.81, p value <0.001) in patients with eGFR >30 to 60, and HR 0.76 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.92, p value <0.001) in patients with eGFR ≤30 or on dialysis. Bleeding requiring hospitalization was also less in the DOAC group with a HR 0.93 (95% CI 0.82 to 1.04, p value 0.209) in patients with eGFR >60, HR 0.83 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.94, p value 0.003) in patients with eGFR >30 to 60, and HR 0.69 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.93, p value 0.017) in patients with eGFR ≤30 or on dialysis. In conclusion, in comparison to warfarin, DOACs appear to be safe and effective with a lower risk of all-cause mortality and lower bleeding across all levels of CKD.