Timing of sedation and patient-reported pain outcomes during cardiac catheterization: Results from the UNTAP-intervention study

BACKGROUND

Invasive cardiac catheterization (CC) temporarily increases pain, discomfort, and anxiety. Procedural sedation is deployed to mitigate these symptoms, though practice varies. Research evaluating peri-procedural patient-reported outcomes is lacking.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We randomized 175 patients undergoing CC to short interval ([SI] group, <6 min) or long interval ([LI] group, ≥6 min) time intervals between initial intravenous sedation and local anesthetic administration. Outcomes included: (1) total pain medication use, (2) patient-reported and behaviorally assessed pain and (3) patient satisfaction during outpatient CC. Generalized linear mixed effect models were used to evaluate the impact of treatment time interval on total medication utilization, pain, and satisfaction. Among enrollees the mean age was 62 (standard deviation [SD] = 13.4), a majority were male (66%), white (74%), and overweight (mean body mass index = 28.5 [SD = 5.6]). Total pain medication use did not vary between treatment groups (p = 0.257), with no difference in total fentanyl (p = 0.288) or midazolam (p = 0.292). Post-treatment pain levels and nurse-observed pain were not statistically significant between groups (p = 0.324 & p = 0.656, respectively. No significant differences with satisfaction with sedation were found between the groups (p = 0.95) Patient-reported pain, satisfaction and nurse-observed measures of pain did not differ, after adjustment for demographic and procedural factors. Analyses of treatment effect modification revealed that postprocedure self-reported pain levels varied systematically between individuals undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (SI = 2.2 [0.8, 3.6] vs. LI = 0.7 [-0.6, 2.0]) compared with participants not undergoing PCI (SI = 0.4 [-0.8, 1.7] vs. LI = 0.7 [-0.3, 1.6]) (p = 0.043 for interaction).

CONCLUSION

No consistent treatment differences were found for total medication dose, pain, or satisfaction regardless of timing between sedation and local anesthetic. Treatment moderations were seen for patients undergoing PCI. Further investigation of how procedural and individual factors impact the patient experience during CC is needed.

Long-term outcomes of self-expanding versus balloon-expandable transcatheter aortic valves: Insights from the OBSERVANT study

OBJECTIVES

To compare clinical outcomes of balloon-expandable (BE) and self-expanding (SE) transcatheter aortic valves (TAVs) up to 5 years.

BACKGROUND

To date, no robust, comparative data of BE and SE TAVs at long-term are available.

METHODS

We considered a total of 1,440 patients enrolled in the multicenter OBSERVANT study and undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TF-TAVI) with either supra-annular SE (n = 830, 57.6%) and intra-annular BE (n = 610, 42.4%) valves. Clinical outcomes of the two groups were compared after adjustment using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and confirmed by sensitivity analysis with propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Patients receiving SE valve showed a higher all-cause mortality at 5 years (Kaplan-Meier estimates 52.3% vs. 47.7%; Hazard ratio [HR] 1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.38, p = .04). Landmark analyses showed that there was a not statistically significant reversal of risk excess against the BE group starting from 3 years after TAVI (3-5 years HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.76-1.25, p = .86). Post-procedural, moderate/severe paravalvular regurgitation (PVR)(HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.14-1.87; p < .01) and acute kidney injury (AKI)(HR 3.89, 95% CI 2.47-6.38; p < .01) showed to be independent predictors of 5-year all-cause mortality in multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the intrinsic limitations of the OBSERVANT study, we found that patients undergoing TF-TAVI with a supra-annular SE valve had a higher all-cause mortality compared to those receiving an intra-annular BE valve at 5 years. A late catch up phenomenon of patients receiving the BE valve was observed beyond 3 years. Post-procedural moderate/severe PVR seems to play a crucial role in determining this finding. Comparative studies of new generation devices with longer follow-up are needed to evaluate the benefit of each specific TAV type.

#SoMe for #IC: Optimal use of social media in interventional cardiology

Social media allows interventional cardiologists to disseminate and discuss research and clinical cases in real-time, to demonstrate and learn innovative techniques, to build professional networks, and to reach out to patients and the general public. Social media provides a democratic platform for all participants to influence the conversation and demonstrate their expertise. This review addresses the use of social media for these purposes in interventional cardiology, as well as respect for patient privacy, how to get started on social media, the creation of high-impact social media content, and the role of traditional journals in the age of social media. In the future, we hope that interventional cardiology fellowship programs will incorporate social media training into their curricula. In addition, professional societies may adapt to the rapid dissemination of data on social media by developing processes to update guidelines more rapidly and more frequently.

Understanding the patient experience of pain and discomfort during cardiac catheterization

OBJECTIVES

Patient centeredness is an essential component of high-quality care, yet little is known regarding the patient experience during procedures performed in the cardiac catheterization lab.

BACKGROUND

Available literature focuses on the safe delivery of sedation, but does not address patient-reported satisfaction or comfort. Further delineation of how procedural factors impact the patient experience is needed.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, exploratory analysis of adult cardiac catheterization outpatients (n = 375) receiving physician ordered, nurse administered procedural sedation (benzodiazepine and/or opioids) between April and June, 2017. Data were abstracted from the procedural database, Electronic Health Record, and Press Ganey^© surveys.

RESULTS

The mean age was 63 (SD 12.2), a majority were male (n = 226; 60%), white (n = 271; 73%), and overweight (mean body mass index = 29, SD 6.8). Patient-reported satisfaction with pain control and perceived staff concern for comfort were >75th percentile (Press Ganey^© survey), with no difference in preprocedure and postprocedure pain scores (p = .596). Intraprocedural medication dose range and mean frequency were highly variable: midazolam (0.25-5.5 mg; 1.48); fentanyl (12.5-200 mcg; 1.63); and hydromorphone (0.5-2.5 mg; 1.33). Median time interval between administration of initial sedation and local anesthetic was 6 min. Patients with longer intervals had less frequent dosing (p < .001) and less total procedural sedation (p < .001). Sensitivity analysis revealed that trainee/fellow involvement (p = .001), younger age (p = .002), and shorter time intervals (p < .001) were associated with increased frequency and larger total dose.

CONCLUSIONS

Waiting to gain vascular access following administration of procedural was associated with less frequent subsequent dosing, lower overall administration, and similar patient satisfaction. Optimizing processes for administering periprocedural sedation may allow for less medication without impacting patient experience.

Rate of major adverse renal or cardiac events with iohexol compared to other low osmolar contrast media during interventional cardiovascular procedures

Objective

This study assessed the rate of major adverse renal or cardiac events (MARCE) when iohexol is used during interventional cardiovascular procedures compared to other low osmolar contrast media (LOCMs).

Background

Interventional cardiovascular procedures are often essential for diagnosis and treatment, the risk of MARCE should be considered.

Methods

Data were derived from the Premier Hospital Database January 1, 2010 through September 30, 2015. Patient encounters with an inpatient primary interventional cardiovascular procedure with a single LOCM (iohexol, ioversol, ioxilan, ioxaglate, or iopamidol) were included. The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of MARCE, which included: renal failure with dialysis, acute kidney injury (AKI) with or without dialysis, contrast induced AKI, acute myocardial infarction, angina, stent occlusion/thrombosis, stroke, transient ischemic attack, or death. Multivariable regression analysis was performed using the hospital fixed‐effects specification to assess the relationship between MARCE and iohexol compared to other LOCMs, while controlling for patient demographics, comorbid conditions and reason for hospitalization. As a sensitivity analysis, direct comparisons of iohexol were made to other LOCMs.

Results

A total of 458,091 inpatient encounters met inclusion criteria of which 26% used iohexol and 74% used other LOCMs. Results of multivariable modeling revealed no differences in MARCE rates between iohexol and other LOCMs. When direct comparisons of iohexol vs. ioversol and iopamidol were modeled, no differences in MARCE nor the renal component of MARCE were found.

Conclusions

In this retrospective multicenter study, there were no differences in MARCE events with iohexol compared to other LOCMs during inpatient interventional cardiovascular procedures.

Radiation dose benchmarks in pediatric cardiac catheterization: A prospective multi-center C3PO-QI study

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to update benchmark values to use a quality measure prospectively.

BACKGROUND

Congenital Cardiac Catheterization Outcomes Project - Quality Improvement (C3PO-QI), a multi-center registry, defined initial radiation dose benchmarks retrospectively across common interventional procedures. These data facilitated a dose metric endorsed by the American College of Cardiology in 2014.

METHODS

Data was collected prospectively by 9 C3PO-QI institutions with complete case capture between 1/1/2014 and 6/30/2015. Radiation was measured in total air kerma (mGy), dose area product (DAP) (µGy*M² ), DAP per body weight, and fluoroscopy time (min), and reported by age group as median, 75^th and 95^th %ile for the following six interventional procedures: (1) atrial septal defect closure; (2) aortic valvuloplasty; (3) treatment of coarctation of the aorta; (4) patent ductus arteriosus closure; (5) pulmonary valvuloplasty; and (6) transcatheter pulmonary valve implantation.

RESULTS

The study was comprised of 1,680 unique cases meeting inclusion criteria. Radiation doses were lowest for pulmonary valvuloplasty (age <1 yrs, median mGy: 59, DAP: 249) and highest in transcatheter pulmonary valve implantation (age >15 yrs, median mGy: 1835, DAP: 17990). DAP/kg standardized outcome measures across weights within an age group and procedure type significantly more than DAP alone. Radiation doses decreased for all procedures compared to those reported previously by both median and median weight-based percentile curves. These differences in radiation exposure were observed without changes in median fluoroscopy time.

CONCLUSIONS

This study updates previously established benchmarks to reflect QI efforts over time. These thresholds can be applied for quality measurement and comparison. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Revascularization heart team recommendations as an adjunct to appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularization in patients with complex coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate how a comprehensive evidence-based clinical review by a multidisciplinary revascularization heart team on treatment decisions for revascularization in patients with complex coronary artery disease using SYNTAX scores combined with Society of Thoracic Surgeons-derived clinical variables can be additive to the utilization of Appropriate Use Criteria for coronary revascularization.

BACKGROUND

Decision-making regarding the use of revascularization for coronary artery disease has come under major scrutiny due to inappropriate overuse of revascularization. There is little data in routine clinical practice evaluating how a structured, multidisciplinary heart team approach may be used in combination with the Appropriate Use Criteria for revascularization.

METHODS

From May 1, 2012 to January 1, 2015, multidisciplinary revascularization heart team meetings were convened to discuss evidence-based management of 301 patients with complex coronary artery disease. Heart team recommendations were adjudicated with the Appropriate Use Criteria for coronary revascularization for each clinical scenario using the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions' Quality Improvement Toolkit (SCAI-QIT) Appropriate Use Criteria App.

RESULTS

Concordance of the Heart Team to Appropriate Use Criteria had a 99.3% appropriate primary indication for coronary revascularization. Among patients who underwent percutaneous revascularization, 34.9% had an inappropriate or uncertain indication as recommended by the Heart Team. Patients with uncertain or inappropriate percutaneous coronary interventions had significantly higher SYNTAX score (27.3 ± 6.6; 28.5 ± 5.5; 19.2 ± 6; P < 0.0001) and Society of Thoracic Surgeons-Predicted Risk of Mortality (6.1% ± 4.7%; 8.1% ± 6.3%; 3.7% ± 4.1%; P < 0.0081) compared to appropriate indications, frequently had concomitant forms of advanced comorbidities and frailty in the setting of symptomatic coronary artery disease.

CONCLUSIONS

A formal, multidisciplinary revascularization heart team can provide proper validation for clinical decisions and should be considered in combination with the Appropriate Use Criteria for coronary revascularization to formulate revascularization strategies for individuals in a patient-centered fashion. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The Flatstent versus the conventional umbrella devices in the percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale

BACKGROUND

Patent foramen ovale (PFO) has been associated with paradoxical embolism leading to stroke/transient ischemic attack, migraine, and neurological decompression sickness. In search for the optimal device that would achieve effective clinical closure with minimal complications, a better device selection based on PFO anatomy and improvements in device design is needed. The Flatstent is a new device designed to treat the highly prevalent long-tunnel PFOs from within, minimizing the amount of material left behind in an attempt to reduce device-related complications. The objective is to compare the safety and efficacy of the novel Flatstent versus the conventional umbrella devices in the transcatheter closure of PFO in a nonrandomized, retrospective, single-center study.

METHODS

Between March 2010 and March 2013, 88 patients underwent PFO closure at The Heart Hospital, London with either the novel Flatstent or one of the four conventionally used umbrella devices (GORE Helex Septal Occluder, Occlutech Figulla Flex, Biostar Septal Occluder, and Amplatzer PFO Occluder) depending on their PFO anatomy. Patients were then evaluated with contrast transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and/or transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) at 6 weeks and 1 year after the procedure. The residual shunt and complication rates between the Flatstent and umbrella devices were compared.

RESULTS

The Flatstent was used in 27 patients (30.7%), whereas 61 patients (69.3%) received one of the four umbrella devices. Primary efficacy point of clinical closure defined as grade 0 or grade 1; residual shunt was achieved in 81.3% in the Flatstent cohort and 80.3% in the umbrella device group at 6 weeks follow-up. At 1 year, the clinical closure rates reached 92.6 and 91.8%. There were two device embolizations, one in each cohort during the immediate postoperative period (<24 hrs), with successful retrieval. One patient in the umbrella device group developed transient atrial fibrillation, which was controlled medically. Event recurrence rate was 0% at 1 year.

CONCLUSION

No difference was found in closure or complication rates between the Flatstent and the umbrella devices. With appropriate preassessment of the PFO anatomy, the Flatstent works as a safe and effective method of treating the PFO from within the tunnel, especially in those with long-tunnel PFOs. Longer follow-up is needed to establish superiority.

Single center TAVR experience with a focus on the prevention and management of catastrophic complications

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an important treatment option for patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) who are inoperable or at high risk for complications with surgical aortic valve replacement. We report here our single-center data on consecutive patients undergoing transfemoral (TF) TAVR since the inception of our program, with a special focus on minimizing and managing complications.

METHODS

The patient population consists of all consecutive patients who underwent an attempted TF-TAVR at our institution, beginning with the first proctored case in May 2006, through December 2012. Clinical, procedural, and echocardiographic data were collected by chart review and echo database query. All events are reported according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2.

RESULTS

During the study period, 255 patients with AS had attempted TF-TAVR. The procedure was successful in 244 (95.7%) patients. Serious complications including aortic annular rupture (n = 2), coronary occlusion (n = 2), iliac artery rupture (n = 1), and ventricular embolization (n = 1) were successfully managed. Death and stroke rate at 30 days was 0.4% and 1.6%, respectively. One-year follow-up was complete in 171 (76%) patients. One-year mortality was 17.5% with a 3.5% stroke rate. Descending aortic rupture, while advancing the valve, was the only fatal procedural event. There were 24.4% patients with ≥2+ aortic regurgitation.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVR can be accomplished with excellent safety in a tertiary center with a well-developed infrastructure for the management of serious complications. The data presented here provide support for TAVR as an important treatment option, and results from randomized trials of patients with lower surgical risk are eagerly awaited.