Search

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether TTM treatment was aligned with predicted mortality risk in patients with resuscitated OHCA during a period when it was a class I guideline recommended therapy. METHODS: Within the Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival for OHCA, we identified adult patients with OHCA who survived to hospital admission and were presumed eligible for TTM. Multivariable models were constructed using pre-hospital variables to predict in-hospital death in patients with shockable and non-shockable rhythms. Within each rhythm category, we divided patients into deciles of predicted mortality risk and examined TTM treatment rates across deciles. RESULTS: From 2013-2019, there were 25,882 successfully resuscitated patients with shockable rhythms and 43,414 patients with non-shockable rhythms presumed eligible for TTM. Of patients with shockable rhythms, predicted in-hospital mortality ranged from 16%-78% in deciles 1-10. TTM treatment increased from 44% in decile 1 to 59% in decile 10 (P for trend

BACKGROUND Whether initial invasive management in older vs younger adults with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia improves health status or clinical outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVES The goal of this study was to examine the impact of age on health status and clinical outcomes with invasive vs conservative management in the ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial. METHODS One-year angina-specific health status was assessed with the 7-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) (score range 0-100; higher scores indicate better health status). Cox proportional hazards models estimated the treatment effect of invasive vs conservative management as a function of age on the composite clinical outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for resuscitated cardiac arrest, unstable angina, or heart failure. RESULTS Among 4,617 participants, 2,239 (48.5%) were aged

AimsImproving the health status (symptoms, function, and quality of life) of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is a primary treatment goal. Angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI) improve short-term health status in clinical practice, but the sustainability of these improvements is unknown.Methods and resultsIn CHAMP-HF, a multicentre observational study of outpatients with HFrEF, patients initiated on ARNI were propensity score matched 1:2 to patients not using ARNI with Cox regression modelling time to ARNI initiation, adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical variables, medical history, medications, and baseline Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) scores. Repeated measures models for the overall KCCQ score and each domain compared the health status trajectories of patients initiated on ARNI vs. not. Among 3930 participants, 746 (19.0%) began ARNI, of whom 576 were matched to 1152 non-ARNI patients. Prior to matching, participants initiated on ARNI were younger, non-Hispanic, had lower EFs, more commonly had a history of ventricular arrhythmia, were less likely to be taking an ACEI/ARB, and more likely to be treated with beta-blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. There were no differences after matching. In the matched cohort, participants initiated on ARNI experienced improved health status by 3months that persisted through 12months [KCCQ Overall Summary Score (OSS)=73.4 vs. 70.8; P&nbsp

BackgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) adversely impacts health-related quality of life (hrQoL). While some patients demonstrate improvements in hrQoL, the factors associated with large improvements in hrQoL are not well described.MethodsWe assessed factors associated with a 1-year increase in the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality-of-Life score of 1 SD (≥18 points; 3× clinically important difference), among outpatients in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation I registry.ResultsOverall, 28% (181/636) of patients had such a hrQoL improvement. Compared with patients not showing large hrQoL improvement, they were of similar age (median 73 versus 74, P=0.3), equally likely to be female (44% versus 48%, P=0.3), but more likely to have newly diagnosed AF at baseline (18% versus 8%; P=0.0004), prior antiarrhythmic drug use (52% versus 40%, P=0.005), baseline antiarrhythmic drug use (34.8% versus 26.8%, P=0.045), and more likely to undergo AF-related procedures during follow-up (AF ablation: 6.6% versus 2.0%, P=0.003; cardioversion: 12.2% versus 5.9%, P=0.008). In multivariable analysis, a history of alcohol abuse (adjusted OR, 2.41; P=0.01) and increased baseline diastolic blood pressure (adjusted OR, 1.23 per 10-point increase and >65 mm Hg; P=0.04) were associated with large improvements in hrQoL at 1 year, whereas patients with prior stroke/transient ischemic attack, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and peripheral arterial disease were less likely to improve (P

ObjectiveTo determine the use of epinephrine (adrenaline) before defibrillation for treatment of in-hospital cardiac arrest due to a ventricular arrhythmia and examine its association with patient survival.DesignPropensity matched analysis.Setting2000-18 data from 497 hospitals participating in the American Heart Association’s Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation registry.ParticipantsAdults aged 18 and older with an index in-hospital cardiac arrest due to an initial shockable rhythm treated with defibrillation.InterventionsAdministration of epinephrine before first defibrillation.Main outcome measuresSurvival to discharge; favorable neurological survival, defined as survival to discharge with none, mild, or moderate neurological disability measured using cerebral performance category scores; and survival after acute resuscitation (that is, return of spontaneous circulation for >20 minutes). A time dependent, propensity matched analysis was performed to adjust for confounding due to indication and evaluate the independent association of epinephrine before defibrillation with study outcomes.ResultsAmong 34 820 patients with an initial shockable rhythm, 7054 (20.3%) were treated with epinephrine before defibrillation, contrary to current guidelines. In comparison with participants treated with defibrillation first, participants receiving epinephrine first were less likely to have a history of myocardial infarction or heart failure, but more likely to have renal failure, sepsis, respiratory insufficiency, and receive mechanical ventilation before in-hospital cardiac arrest (standardized differences >10% for all). Treatment with epinephrine before defibrillation was strongly associated with delayed defibrillation (median 4 minutesv0 minutes). In propensity matched analysis (6569 matched pairs), epinephrine before defibrillation was associated with lower odds of survival to discharge (22.4%v29.7%; adjusted odds ratio 0.69; 95% confidence interval 0.64 to 0.74; Pv21.6%; 0.68; 0.61 to 0.76; Pv69.5%; 0.73; 0.67 to 0.79; PConclusionsContrary to current guidelines that prioritize immediate defibrillation for in-hospital cardiac arrest due to a shockable rhythm, one in five patients are treated with epinephrine before defibrillation. Use of epinephrine before defibrillation was associated with worse survival outcomes.

ObjectiveTo describe self-reported disease understanding for newly diagnosed patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and assess (1) how disease understanding changes over the first 6 months after diagnosis and (2) the relationship between patient understanding of therapies at baseline and treatment receipt at 6 months among treatment-naïve patients.MethodsWe analysed survey data from SATELLITE (Survey of Patient Knowledge and Personal Priorities for Treatment), a substudy of patients with new-onset AF enrolled in the national Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT) II registry across 56 US sites. Patients were surveyed at the baseline and 6-month follow-up clinic visits using Likert scales.ResultsAmong 1004 baseline survey responses, patients' confidence in their understanding of rhythm control, ablation, anticoagulation and cardioversion was suboptimal, with 'high' understanding ranging from 8.5% for left atrial appendage closure to 71.3% for rhythm therapy. Of medical history and demographic factors, education level was the strongest predictor of reporting 'high' disease understanding. Among the 786 patients with 6-month survey data, significant increases in the proportion reporting high understanding were observed (p

BackgroundNon-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are indicated for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) but require lower doses in certain patients. We sought to describe the frequency, appropriateness (according to Food and Drug Administration labeling), and outcomes of patients prescribed reduced doses of NOACs in community practice.Methods and resultsWe analyzed data from the ORBIT-AF II (The Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation II) registry, a prospective, national, observational registry of AF patients. Among 7925 AF patients receiving NOACs, we assessed patterns of use of reduced NOAC doses and associated cardiovascular and bleeding outcomes at median follow-up of 1year. Overall, 6636 patients (84%) received a NOAC at standard dose, which was consistent with US Food and Drug Administration labeling in 6376 (96%). Reduced NOAC dose was prescribed to 1289 (16% overall), which was consistent with Food and Drug Administration labeling in only 555 patients (43%). Compared with those whose NOAC dose was appropriately reduced, patients receiving inappropriate dose reductions were younger (median age 79 versus 84, P

BackgroundAs treatment options for atrial fibrillation (AF) increase, more attention is focused on patients' experiences and quality of life (QoL). However, little is known about the factors associated with these outcomes.MethodsThe Atrial Fibrillation Effect on QualiTy-of-life (AFEQT) is a disease-specific QoL tool for AF, with domain and summary scores ranging from 0 (the worst QoL) to 100. Using multivariable linear regression, we evaluated factors associated with baseline AFEQT Summary and Subscale Scores in ORBIT AF, a large, community-based AF registry. Independent associations were reported as coefficient estimates in scores and 95% confidence intervals (CI).ResultsOverall, AFEQT was assessed in 2007 AF outpatients from 99 sites. Median age (IQR) was 76 years (67-82) and 43% were female. The median AFEQT summary score was 82 (67-94). Female sex, younger age, new onset AF, higher heart rate, obstructive sleep apnea, symptomatic heart failure (HF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and coronary artery disease were all independently associated with reduced QoL. Female sex [Estimate -7.03, 95% CI (-9.31, -4.75)] and new onset versus permanent AF [Estimate -7.44, 95% CI (-11.03, -3.84)] were independently associated with increased symptoms. NYHA Class III or IV HF [Estimate -14.44, 95% CI (-19.46, -8.76)] and female sex [Estimate -7.91, 95% CI (-9.95, -5.88)] were most independently associated with impaired daily activities.ConclusionsQoL in patients with AF varies widely and is associated with several patient factors. Understanding patient factors independently associated with worse QoL can be a foundation for tailoring treatment.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to investigate the prevalence and predictors of oral anticoagulation prescription among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) at the lowest risk for thromboembolism, despite contemporary consensus guidelines that do not recommend anticoagulation therapy in this population. BACKGROUND: In young and healthy AF patients without significant thromboembolic risk factors, anticoagulant treatment carries bleeding risks that outweigh stroke prevention benefit. METHODS: Within a large contemporary registry of cardiology outpatients, we identified low-risk patients with AF meeting criteria for a contemporary consensus guideline class III indication against use of anticoagulation (age < 60 years, CHADS2 Score=0, and no structural heart disease) between 2008–2012, and a second cohort with the same criteria and a CHA2DS2-VASc Score of 0. Using hierarchical modified Poisson regression models adjusted for patient characteristics, we examined predictors of oral anticoagulation treatment in these low thromboembolic risk AF patients. RESULTS: Oral anticoagulation was prescribed in a total of 2,561 of 10,995 (23.2%) AF patients with a CHADS2 score of 0 and 1,787 of 6,730 (26.6%) AF patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc score of 0. In multivariable analysis, older age (RR 1.48 per 10 years; 95% CI, 1.41–1.56; p

ObjectivesCHARISMA was a landmark randomized clinical trial that failed to demonstrate a benefit of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) over aspirin alone for preventing cardiovascular events. However, subgroup analyses of the trial found fewer major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) for patients with established cardiovascular disease but more MACEs for patients with multiple risk factors without established cardiovascular disease. Our objective was to examine DAPT use in contemporary clinical practice after publication of CHARISMA results.Study designRetrospective analysis of a large clinical registry of outpatient cardiovascular visits to over 1000 physicians that collected data on patient clinical history, symptoms, vital signs, and medications.MethodsClinical characteristics and prescription rates of aspirin and clopidogrel were compared for patients with established cardiovascular disease and for patients with only multiple cardiovascular risk factors. Prescription of DAPT by calendar quarter was evaluated from 2008 to 2011 using multivariable Poisson regression models.ResultsOf 167,839 patients with established cardiovascular disease, 20.5% were prescribed both aspirin and clopidogrel. Of 20,478 patients with multiple risk factors but no known cardiovascular disease, 3.5% were prescribed both aspirin and clopidogrel. Across 14 calendar quarters, prescription rates of DAPT did not change significantly for patients with established CVD but decreased for patients with multiple risk factors with an incidence rate ratio of 0.77.ConclusionsUse of DAPT is modest in patients with established cardiovascular disease, for whom the CHARISMA trial suggested decreased MACEs, and prescription rates have remained stable over time. Use of DAPT in patients with multiple risk factors only, for whom CHARISMA suggested that DAPT may lead to increased MACE, was low and decreased over time.

This study assessed practice variations in secondary prevention medication prescriptions among coronary artery disease (CAD) patients treated in outpatient practices participating in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence (PINNACLE) registry.Among patients with CAD, secondary prevention with a combination of beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, and statins reduces cardiac mortality and myocardial infarction (MI). Accordingly, every CAD patient should receive the combination of these medications for which they are eligible. However, little is known about current prescription patterns of these medications and the variation in use among outpatient cardiology clinics.Using data from NCDR PINNACLE registry, a national outpatient cardiology practice registry, we assessed medication prescription patterns among eligible CAD patients, between July 2008 and December 2010. Overall rates of prescription and variation by practice were calculated, adjusting for patient characteristics.Among 156,145 CAD patients in 58 practices, 103,830 (66.5%) patients were prescribed the optimal combination of medications for which they were eligible. The median rate of optimal combined prescription by practice was 73.5% and varied from 28.8% to 100%. After adjustment for patient factors, the practice median rate ratio for prescription was 1.25 (95% confidence interval: 1.20 to 1.32), indicating a 25% likelihood that 2 random practices would differ in treating identical CAD patients.Among a national registry of CAD patients treated in outpatient cardiology practices, over one-third of patients failed to receive their optimal combination of secondary prevention medications. Significant variation was observed across practices, even after adjusting for patient characteristics, suggesting that quality improvement efforts may be needed to support more uniform practice.