Search

Background: Bleeding is a common and costly complication of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Bleeding avoidance strategies (BAS) are used paradoxically less in patients at high-risk of bleeding: "bleeding risk-treatment paradox" (RTP). We determined whether hospitals and physicians, who do not align BAS to PCI patients' bleeding risk (ie, exhibit a RTP) have higher bleeding rates.Methods: We examined 28,005 PCIs from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry for 7 hospitals comprising BJC HealthCare. BAS included transradial intervention, bivalirudin, and vascular closure devices. Patients' predicted bleeding risk was based on National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI bleeding model and categorized as low (<2.0%), moderate (2.0%-6.4%), or high (≥6.5%) risk tertiles. BAS use was considered risk-concordant if: at least 1 BAS was used for moderate risk; 2 BAS were used for high risk and bivalirudin or vascular closure devices were not used for low risk. Absence of risk-concordant BAS use was defined as RTP. We analyzed inter-hospital and inter-physician variation in RTP, and the association of RTP with post-PCI bleeding.Results: Amongst 28,005 patients undergoing PCI by 103 physicians at 7 hospitals, RTP was observed in 12,035 (43%) patients. RTP was independently associated with a higher likelihood of bleeding even after adjusting for predicted bleeding risk, mortality risk and potential sources of variation (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.44-1.92, P < .001). A higher prevalence of RTP strongly and independently correlated with worse bleeding rates, both at the physician-level (Wilk's Lambda 0.9502, F-value 17.21, P < .0001) and the hospital-level (Wilk's Lambda 0.9899, F-value 35.68, P < .0001). All the results were similar in a subset of PCIs conducted since 2015 - a period more reflective of the contemporary practice.Conclusions: Bleeding RTP is a strong, independent predictor of bleeding. It exists at the level of physicians and hospitals: those with a higher rate of RTP had worse bleeding rates. These findings not only underscore the importance of recognizing bleeding risk upfront and using BAS in a risk-aligned manner, but also inform and motivate national efforts to reduce PCI-related bleeding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Randomized controlled trials are the "gold standard" for comparing the safety and efficacy of therapies but may be limited due to high costs, lack of feasibility, and difficulty enrolling "real-world" patient populations. The Extending Trial-Based Evaluations of Medical Therapies Using Novel Sources of Data (EXTEND) Study seeks to evaluate whether data collected within procedural registries and claims databases can reproduce trial results by substituting surrogate non-trial-based variables for exposures and outcomes.Methods and Results: Patient-level data from 2 clinical trial programs-the Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Study and the United States CoreValve Studies-will be linked to a combination of national registry, administrative claims, and health system data. The concordance between baseline and outcomes data collected within nontrial data sets and trial information, including adjudicated end point events, will be assessed. We will compare the study results obtained using these alternative data sources to those derived using trial-ascertained variables and end points using trial-adjudicated end points and covariates.Conclusions: Linkage of trials to registries and claims data represents an opportunity to use alternative data sources in place of and as adjuncts to randomized clinical trial data but requires further validation. The results of this research will help determine how these data sources can be used to improve our present and future understanding of new medical treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Clinical trials have demonstrated the benefit of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) for the primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in selected high-risk individuals. Because of small numbers of women enrolled in these trials, outcomes for women after hospital discharge have not been well described. We compared procedure-related complications and outcomes after hospital discharge between men and women undergoing single- or dual-chamber ICD implantation for primary prevention. Methods In patients 65 years or older with Medicare fee-for-service coverage, we identified 38,912 initial implants (25% women) who received single- or dual-chamber ICDs for primary prevention between January 2006 and December 2009 in the NCDR and evaluated gender differences in outcomes. Results Women had greater comorbidity and more advanced heart failure (HF) at the time of ICD implantation than did men. Device-related complications, death at 6 months, all-cause readmissions, and HF readmissions at 6 months were significantly more common in women (7.2% vs 4.8%, 6.5% vs 5.6%, 37.2% vs 31.7%, and 14.0% vs 10.0% respectively; P < .001 for all). Women continued to have higher odds of procedural complications (odds ratio [OR] 1.39, 95% CI 1.26-1.53, P < .001), 6-month all-cause readmission (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.16-1.28, P < .001), and 6-month HF readmission (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.23-1.42, P < .001), with a trend toward higher 6-month mortality (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.98-1.20, P = .123), compared with men, after adjusting for differences in baseline characteristics and device type (single vs dual chamber). Conclusions Among older patients receiving ICDs for primary prevention in clinical practice, women experience worse outcomes than do men. Reasons for gender differences in outcomes are poorly understood and require further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Older women experience higher complication rates and mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) than men, but there is limited evidence about sex-based differences in outcomes among younger patients. We compared rates of complications and inhospital mortality by sex for younger and older PCI patients. Methods: A total of 1,079,751 hospital admissions for PCI were identified in the CathPCI Registry® from 2005 to 2008. Complication rates (general, bleeding, bleeding with transfusion, and vascular) and inhospital mortality after PCI were compared by sex and age (<55 and ≥55 years). Analyses were adjusted for demographic and clinical factors and stratified by PCI type (elective, urgent, or emergency). Results: Overall, 6% of patients experienced complications, and 1% died inhospital. Unadjusted complication rates were higher for women compared with men in both age groups. In risk-adjusted analyses, younger women (odds ratio 1.24, 95% CI 1.16-1.33) and older women (1.27, 1.09-1.47) were more likely to experience any complication than similarly aged men. The increased risk persisted across complication categories and PCI type. Within age groups, risk-adjusted mortality was marginally higher for young women (1.19, 1.00-1.41), but not for older women (1.03, 0.97-1.10). In analyses stratified by PCI type, young women had twice the mortality risk after an elective procedure as young men (2.04, 1.15-3.61). Conclusions: Women, regardless of age, experience more complications after PCI than men; young women are at increased mortality risk after an elective PCI. Identifying strategies to reduce adverse outcomes, particularly for women younger than 55 years, is important. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Accurate and timely prediction of sudden cardiac death (SCD) is a necessary prerequisite for effective prevention and therapy. Although the largest number of SCD events occurs in patients without overt heart disease, there are currently no tests that are of proven predictive value in this population. Efforts in risk stratification for SCD have focused primarily on predicting SCD in patients with known structural heart disease. Despite the ubiquity of tests that have been purported to predict SCD vulnerability in such patients, there is little consensus on which test, in addition to the left ventricular ejection fraction, should be used to determine which patients will benefit from an implantable cardioverter defibrillator. On July 20 and 21, 2006, a group of experts representing clinical cardiology, cardiac electrophysiology, biostatistics, economics, and health policy were joined by representatives of the US Food and Drug administration, Centers for Medicare Services, Agency for Health Research and Quality, the Heart Rhythm Society, and the device and pharmaceutical industry for a round table meeting to review current data on strategies of risk stratification for SCD, to explore methods to translate these strategies into practice and policy, and to identify areas that need to be addressed by future research studies. The meeting was organized by the Duke Center for the Prevention of SCD at the Duke Clinical Research Institute and was funded by industry participants. This article summarizes the presentations and discussions that occurred at that meeting. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objective We sought to determine survival for patients with heart failure after an implantation of an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) for primary prevention in the United States and to develop a simple model that would predict mortality risk. Background Clinical trials have found that patients with heart failure with a 1-year mortality risk near 20% may not benefit from an ICD. Methods We identified patients from the ICD Registry of the National Cardiovascular Disease Registries who underwent ICD implantation for primary prevention from 2007 to 2009. Two risk scores for mortality were developed in 2 cohorts: one limited to those with a B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) value and a second for all patients. The scores were obtained from derivation datasets and tested in a validation sets using logistic regression models and classification and regression trees. Results In a primary prevention population with BNP available (18,725) the 6 variables most predictive of 1-year mortality were age ≥75, BNP ≥700 pg/mL, chronic lung disease, dialysis, blood urea nitrogen ≥30 mg/dL, and systolic blood pressure <120 mmHg. Patients with zero risk factors had a 3.3% one-year mortality compared to a 66.7% one-year mortality for those with all 6 risk factors. Those with ≥3 risk factors (24.0% of the population) had a 25.8% one-year mortality. A second score using a larger cohort that did not consider BNP identified similar risk factors. Conclusions A simple validated risk score can identify patients at high and low risk for death within a year after ICD placement. A large fraction of those currently implanted with an ICD in the United States have a high 1-year mortality and may not benefit from ICD therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]