Search

BackgroundPatients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) complicated by an out-of-hospital-cardiac-arrest (OHCA) may vary widely in their probability of dying. Large variation in mortality may have implications for current national efforts to benchmark operator and hospital mortality rates for coronary angiography. We aimed to build a risk-adjustment model of in-hospital mortality among OHCA survivors with concurrent STEMI.MethodsWithin the Cardiac Arrest Registry to Enhance Survival (CARES), we included adults with OHCA and STEMI who underwent emergent angiography within 2 hours of hospital arrival between January 2013 and December 2019. Using multivariable logistic regression to adjust for patient and cardiac arrest factors, we developed a risk-adjustment model for in-hospital mortality and examined variation in patients' predicted mortality.ResultsOf 2,999 patients (mean age 61.2 ± 12.0, 23.1% female, 64.6% white), 996 (33.2%) died during their hospitalization. The final risk-adjustment model included higher age (OR per 10-year increase, 1.50 [95% CI: 1.39-1.63]), unwitnessed OHCA (OR, 2.51 [1.99-3.16]), initial non-shockable rhythm [OR, 5.66 [4.52-7.13]), lack of sustained pulse for > 20 minutes (OR, 2.52 [1.88-3.36]), and longer resuscitation time (increased with each 10-minute interval) (c-statistic = 0.804 with excellent calibration). There was large variability in predicted mortality: median, 25.2%, inter-quartile-range: 14.0% to 47.8%, 10th-90th percentile: 8.2 % to 74.1%.ConclusionsIn a large national registry, we identified 5 key predictors for mortality in patients with STEMI and OHCA and found wide variability in mortality risk. Our findings suggest that current national benchmarking efforts for coronary angiography, which simply adjusts for the presence of OHCA, may not adequately capture patient case-mix severity.

BackgroundHealth status outcomes are increasingly being promoted as measures of health care quality, given their importance to patients. In heart failure (HF), an American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force proposed using the proportion of patients with preserved health status as a quality measure but not as a performance measure because risk adjustment methods were not available.MethodsWe built risk adjustment models for alive with preserved health status and for preserved health status alone in a prospective registry of outpatients with HF with reduced ejection fraction across 146 US centers between December 2015 and October 2017. Preserved health status was defined as not having a ≥5-point decrease in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary score at 1 year. Using only patient-level characteristics, hierarchical multivariable logistic regression models were developed for 1-year outcomes and validated using data from 1 to 2 years. We examined model calibration, discrimination, and variability in sites' unadjusted and adjusted rates.ResultsAmong 3932 participants (median age [interquartile range] 68 years [59-75], 29.7% female, 75.4% White), 2703 (68.7%) were alive with preserved health status, 902 (22.9%) were alive without preserved health status, and 327 (8.3%) had died by 1 year. The final risk adjustment model for alive with preserved health status included baseline Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary, age, race, employment status, annual income, body mass index, depression, atrial fibrillation, renal function, number of hospitalizations in the past 1 year, and duration of HF (optimism-corrected C statistic=0.62 with excellent calibration). Similar results were observed when deaths were ignored. The risk standardized proportion of patients alive with preserved health status across the 146 sites ranged from 62% at the 10th percentile to 75% at the 90th percentile. Variability across sites was modest and changed minimally with risk adjustment.ConclusionsThrough leveraging data from a large, outpatient, observational registry, we identified key factors to risk adjust sites' proportions of patients with preserved health status. These data lay the foundation for building quality measures that quantify treatment outcomes from patients' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Caregivers of patients with advanced heart failure may experience burden in providing care, but whether changes in patient health status are associated with caregiver burden is unknown. This observational study included older patients (60-80 years old) receiving advanced surgical heart failure therapies and their caregivers at 13 US sites. Patient health status was assessed using the 12-item Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (range, 0-100; higher scores are better). Caregiver burden was assessed using the Oberst Caregiving Burden Scale, which measures time on task (OCBS-time) and task difficulty (OCBS-difficulty; range, 1-5; lower scores are better). Measurements occurred before surgery and 12 months after in 3 advanced heart failure cohorts: patients receiving longterm left ventricular assist device support; heart transplantation with pretransplant left ventricular assist device support; and heart transplantation without pretransplant left ventricular assist device support. Multivariable linear regression was used to identify predictors of change in OCBS-time and OCBS-difficulty at 12 months. RESULTS: Of 162 caregivers, the mean age was 61.0±9.4 years, 139 (86%) were female, and 140 (86%) were the patient's spouse. At 12 months, 99 (61.1%) caregivers experienced improved OCBS-time, and 61 (37.7%) experienced improved OCBS-difficulty (versus no change or worse OCBS). A 10-point higher baseline 12-item Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire predicted lower 12-month OCBS-time (ß=-0.09 [95% CI, -0.14 to -0.03]; P<0.001) and OCBS-difficulty (ß=-0.08 [95% CI, -0.12 to -0.05]; P<0.001). Each 10-point improvement in the 12-item Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire predicted lower 12-month OCBS-time (ß=-0.07 [95% CI, -0.12 to -0.03]; P=0.002) and OCBS-difficulty (ß=-0.09 [95% CI, -0.12 to -0.06]; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS:' Among survivors at 12 months, baseline and change in patient health status were associated with subsequent caregiver time on task and task difficulty in dyads receiving advanced heart failure surgical therapies, highlighting the potential for serial 12-item Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire assessments to identify caregivers at risk of increased burden. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: There is limited literature on sample adequacy for molecular testing and genomic sequencing for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma obtained via EUS fine-needle aspiration (FNA) versus EUS fine-needle biopsy (FNB). Thus, we aimed to compare these two modalities regarding sample adequacy for molecular testing and genomic sequencing. In this retrospective chart review study, we analyzed all patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent EUS at Saint Luke's Hospital, Kansas City, MO, from 1 January 2018, to 31 December 2021. A rapid on-site evaluation was performed for all cases by cytotechnologists. We found that out of 1417 EUS procedures, 132 patients underwent EUS-guided biopsies. The mean number of passes required for FNB and FNA was similar. However, EUS-FNB, under rapid on-site specimen evaluation guidance, was superior to FNA in obtaining adequate samples for molecular testing. In addition, tumor surface area and tumor cellularity are essential parameters in determining sample adequacy for molecular testing, regardless of the tissue acquisition modality. Background and Aims: There is limited literature on sample adequacy for molecular testing in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma obtained via endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) fine-needle aspiration (FNA) versus EUS fine-needle biopsy (FNB). We aimed to compare these two modalities regarding sample adequacy for molecular and genomic sequencing. Methods: We reviewed all patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent EUS at Saint Luke's Hospital from 2018 to 2021. The patients were categorized based on the method of EUS tissue acquisition, specifically FNA or FNB. A comprehensive evaluation was conducted for all cases by cytotechnologists. Results: Out of 132 patients who underwent EUS-guided biopsies, 76 opted for FNA, 48 opted for FNB, and 8 opted for a combination of both. The average number of passes required for FNB and FNA was 2.58 ± 1.06 and 2.49 ± 1.07, respectively (p = 0.704), indicating no significant difference. Interestingly, 71.4% (35) of FNB-obtained samples were deemed adequate for molecular testing, surpassing the 32.1% (26) adequacy observed with FNA (p < 0.001). Additionally, 46.4% (26) of FNB-obtained samples were considered adequate for genomic testing, a notable improvement over the 23.8% (20) adequacy observed with FNA (p = 0.005). Conclusion: Although the number of passes required for cytologic diagnosis did not differ significantly between EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA, the former demonstrated superiority in obtaining samples adequate for molecular testing. Tumor surface area and cellularity were crucial parameters in determining sample adequacy for molecular testing, irrespective of the chosen tissue acquisition modality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper draws on three case studies which show feasible and economic results in meeting net zero carbon emissions targets through Smart Local Energy Systems (SLES) in different localities across England, exploring opportunities to utilise waste heat from industry. They are based on the GreenSCIES model for which the blueprint was developed in London, Study 1. It consists of a fifth generation (5G) ambient loop district heat network using waste heat from a data centre, integrated with electric vehicle charging, storage and solar PV. The network includes decentralised heat pumps and allows for (i) heat sharing between buildings and (ii) applications for heat recovery from local sources. Study 2 is based on a heat network with waste heat from a foundry and some cooling supply and heat storage in the aquifer. Study 3 explored waste heat from a glassworks and considered mine workings for providing heat storage. These SLES projects illustrate how to integrate local waste heat sources in 3G and 4G heat networks, adapting the original GreenSCIES concept, providing pathways towards net zero carbon for a diverse range of urban locations with different waste heat sources, and further demonstrate the importance of collaboration between researchers, local government and industry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Medicare Advantage (MA), Medicare's managed care program, is quickly expanding, yet little is known about diabetes care quality delivered under MA compared with traditional fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare.Research Design and Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries ≥65 years old enrolled in the Diabetes Collaborative Registry from 2014 to 2019 with type 2 diabetes treated with one or more antihyperglycemic therapies. Quality measures, cardiometabolic risk factor control, and antihyperglycemic prescription patterns were compared between Medicare plan groups, adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical factors.Results: Among 345,911 Medicare beneficiaries, 229,598 (66%) were enrolled in FFS and 116,313 (34%) in MA plans (for ≥1 month). MA beneficiaries were more likely to receive ACE inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers for coronary artery disease, tobacco cessation counseling, and screening for retinopathy, foot care, and kidney disease (adjusted P ≤ 0.001 for all). MA beneficiaries had modestly but significantly higher systolic blood pressure (+0.2 mmHg), LDL cholesterol (+2.6 mg/dL), and HbA1c (+0.1%) (adjusted P < 0.01 for all). MA beneficiaries were independently less likely to receive glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (6.9% vs. 9.0%; adjusted odds ratio 0.80, 95% CI 0.77-0.84) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (5.4% vs. 6.7%; adjusted odds ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.87-0.95). When integrating Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services-linked data from 2014 to 2017 and more recent unlinked data from the Diabetes Collaborative Registry through 2019 (total N = 411,465), these therapeutic differences persisted, including among subgroups with established cardiovascular and kidney disease.Conclusions: While MA plans enable greater access to preventive care, this may not translate to improved intermediate health outcomes. MA beneficiaries are also less likely to receive newer antihyperglycemic therapies with proven outcome benefits in high-risk individuals. Long-term health outcomes under various Medicare plans requires surveillance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with significant (>=50%) left main disease (LMD) have a high risk of cardiovascular events, and guidelines recommend revascularization to improve survival. However, the impact of intermediate LMD (stenosis, 25%-49%) on outcomes is unclear. Methods: Randomized ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches) participants who underwent coronary computed tomography angiography at baseline were categorized into those with (25%-49%) and without (<25%) intermediate LMD. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. The primary quality of life outcome was the Seattle Angina Questionnaire summary score. Results: Among the 3699 participants who satisfied the inclusion criteria, 962 (26%) had intermediate LMD. Among invasive strategy participants with intermediate LMD on coronary computed tomography angiography, 49 (7.0%) had significant (>=50% stenosis) left main stenosis on invasive angiography. Patients with intermediate LMD had a higher risk of cardiovascular events in the unadjusted but not in the fully adjusted model compared with those without intermediate LMD. An invasive strategy increased procedural MI and decreased nonprocedural MI with no significant difference for other outcomes including the primary end point. There was no meaningful heterogeneity of treatment effect based on intermediate LMD status except for nonprocedural MI for which there was a greater absolute reduction with invasive management in the intermediate LMD group (-6.4% versus -2.0%; P interaction=0.049). The invasive strategy improved angina-related quality of life and the benefit was durable throughout follow-up without significant heterogeneity based on intermediate LMD status. Conclusions: In the ISCHEMIA trial, there was no meaningful heterogeneity of treatment benefit from an invasive strategy regardless of intermediate LMD status except for a greater absolute risk reduction in nonprocedural MI with invasive management in those with intermediate LMD. An invasive strategy increased procedural MI, reduced nonprocedural MI, and improved angina-related quality of life. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01471522. * Patients with significant (>=50%) left main disease (LMD) have a high risk of cardiovascular events, and guidelines recommend revascularization to improve survival. * The impact of intermediate LMD (25%-49% left main stenosis) is not known. * In the ISCHEMIA trial (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches), 26% of participants had intermediate LMD (25%-49% left main stenosis) on coronary computed tomography angiography, and this was a marker for extensive atherosclerosis. * Invasive management increased procedural myocardial infarction, reduced nonprocedural myocardial infarction, and improved angina-related quality of life when compared with conservative management regardless of intermediate LMD status. * Invasive management resulted in a greater reduction in nonprocedural myocardial infarction compared with conservative management in those with intermediate LMD than in those without intermediate LMD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]