Search

Background: Giant coronary artery aneurysms and myocardial fibrosis after Kawasaki disease may lead to devastating cardiovascular outcomes. We characterised the vascular and myocardial outcomes in five selected Kawasaki disease patients with a history of giant coronary artery aneurysms that completely regressed., Methods: Five patients were selected who had giant coronary artery aneurysm in early childhood that regressed when studied 12-33 years after Kawasaki disease onset. Coronary arteries were imaged by coronary CT angiography, and coronary artery calcium volume scores were determined. We used endocardial strain measurements from CT imaging to assess myocardial regional wall function. Calprotectin and galectin-3 (gal-3) as biomarkers of inflammation and myocardial fibrosis were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay., Results: The five selected patients with regressed giant coronary artery aneurysms had calcium scores of zero, normal levels of calprotectin and gal-3, and normal appearance of the coronary arteries by coronary computed tomography angiography. CT strain demonstrated normal peak systolic and diastolic strain patterns in four of five patients. In one patient with a myocardial infarction at the time of Kawasaki disease diagnosis at the age of 10 months, CT strain showed altered global longitudinal strain, reduced segmental peak strain, and reduced diastolic relaxation patterns in multiple left ventricle segments., Conclusions: These patients illustrate that regression of giant aneurysms after Kawasaki disease is possible with no detectable calcium, normal biomarkers of inflammation and fibrosis, and normal myocardial function. Individuals with regressed giant coronary artery aneurysm still require longitudinal surveillance to assess the durability of this favourable outcome.

Background: We evaluated the Vitros® Immunodiagnostic Products N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) II assay for aiding in diagnosis of heart failure (HF) in patients with acute dyspnea., Methods: Serum concentrations of NT-proBNP were measured in patient samples from 20 emergency departments across the United States. Study endpoints included sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, and predictive values for diagnosis of acute HF according to age-stratified cutoffs (450, 900, and 1800 pg/mL), and a rule-out age-independent cutoff (300 pg/mL). Additional measures were area under the curve (AUC) for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Results were also interpreted in patient subgroups with relevant comorbidities, and gray zone/intermediate assay values., Results: Of 2200 patients, 1095 (49.8%) were diagnosed with HF by clinical adjudication. Sensitivity and specificity for Vitros NT-proBNP II ranged from 84.0% to 92.1%, and 81.4% to 86.5%, respectively, within and across age groups, and positive predictive values were 80.4% to 85.7%. Using the rule-out cutoff, the negative predictive value was 97.9%, with a negative likelihood ratio of 0.02. In subgroups with comorbidities potentially affecting NT-proBNP concentrations, sensitivities ranged from 82.6% to 89.5%, and AUCs for ROC curves were 0.899 to 0.915., Conclusions: The Vitros NT-proBNP II assay demonstrated excellent clinical performance using age-stratified cutoffs along with other clinical information for supporting diagnosis of HF, and can rule out HF with a high negative predictive value using the age-independent cutoff. The assay retained utility in patient subgroups with conditions that influence NT-proBNP concentration, and for those with gray zone results., Clinicaltrials.gov Registration Number: NCT03548909., (© Association for Diagnostics & Laboratory Medicine 2024. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Breast arterial calcification (BAC) on mammograms has emerged as a biomarker of women's cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, but there is a lack of quantification tools and clinical outcomes studies., Objectives: This study assessed the association of BAC (both presence and quantity) with CVD outcomes., Methods: This single-center, retrospective study included women with a screening mammogram from 2007 to 2016. BAC was quantified using an artificial intelligence-generated score, which was assessed as both a binary and continuous variable. Regression analyses evaluated the association between BAC and mortality and a composite of acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, and mortality. Analyses were adjusted for age, race, diabetes, smoking, blood pressure, cholesterol, and history of CVD and chronic kidney disease., Results: A total of 18,092 women were included in this study (mean age 56.8 ± 11.0 years; diabetes [13%], hypertension [36%], hyperlipidemia [40%], and smoking [5%]). BAC was present in 4,223 (23%). Over a median follow-up of 6 years, death occurred in 7.8% and 2.3% of women with and without BAC, respectively. The composite occurred in 12.4% and 4.3% of women with and without BAC, respectively. Compared to those without, women with BAC had adjusted HRs of 1.49 (95% CI: 1.33-1.67) for mortality and 1.56 (95% CI: 1.41-1.72) for the composite. Each 10-point increase in the BAC score was associated with higher risk of mortality (HR: 1.08 [95% CI: 1.06-1.11]) and the composite (HR: 1.08 [95% CI: 1.06-1.10]). BAC was especially predictive of future events among younger women., Conclusions: BAC is independently associated with mortality and CVD, especially among younger women. Measurement of BAC beyond presence adds incremental risk stratification. Quantifying BAC using an artificial intelligence algorithm is feasible, clinically relevant, and may improve personalized CVD risk stratification., Competing Interests: This research was in part funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute T32 HL079891-11. Drs Bui, Nerlekar, Eghtedari, and Daniels have served as consultants to CureMetrix. Drs Mantey and Wang are employees of CureMetrix. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Background: The prognostic implications of phenotypes along the preshock to cardiogenic shock (CS) continuum remain uncertain., Objectives: This study sought to better characterize pre- or early shock and normotensive CS phenotypes and examine outcomes compared to those with conventional CS., Methods: The CCCTN (Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network) is a registry of contemporary cardiac intensive care units. Consecutive admissions (N = 28,703 across 47 sites) meeting specific criteria based on hemodynamic variables, perfusion parameters, and investigator-reported CS were classified into 1 of 4 groups or none: isolated low cardiac output (CO), heart failure with isolated hypotension, normotensive CS, or SCAI (Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention) stage C CS. Outcomes of interest were in-hospital mortality and incidence of subsequent hypoperfusion among pre- and early shock states., Results: A total of 2,498 admissions were assigned to the 4 groups with the following distribution: 4.8% isolated low CO, 4.4% isolated hypotension, 12.1% normotensive CS, and 78.7% SCAI stage C CS. Overall in-hospital mortality was 21.3% (95% CI: 19.7%-23.0%), with a gradient across phenotypes (isolated low CO 3.6% [95% CI: 1.0%-9.0%]; isolated hypotension 11.0% [95% CI: 6.9%-16.6%]; normotensive CS 17.0% [95% CI 13.0%-21.8%]; SCAI stage C CS 24.0% [95% CI: 22.1%-26.0%]; global P < 0.001). Among those with an isolated low CO and isolated hypotension on admission, 47 (42.3%) and 56 (30.9%) subsequently developed hypoperfusion., Conclusions: In a large contemporary registry of cardiac critical illness, there exists a gradient of mortality for phenotypes along the preshock to CS continuum with risk for subsequent worsening of preshock states. These data may inform refinement of CS definitions and severity staging., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Patel is supported by T32 postdoctoral training grant T32HL007604 from the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute. Dr Solomon has received research support from the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center intramural research funds. Dr Thompson is supported by National Institutes of Health-NHLBI grant K08HL163328]and by the Michigan Biology of Cardiovascular Aging (M-BoCA) at the University of Michigan. Drs Patel, Berg, Bohula, Park, and Morrow and Ms Baird-Zars are members of the TIMI study group that has received research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Abbott Laboratories, Abiomed, Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Intarcia, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Poxel, Quark Pharmaceuticals, Regeneron, Roche, Siemens, and Zora Biosciences. Dr Patel has received consulting fees from Janssen. Dr Berg has received honoraria from the Medical Education Speakers Network and USV Private Limited; consulting fees from AstraZeneca, MobilityBio, Pfizer, and Youngene Therapeutics; and serves on clinical endpoint committees for studies sponsored by Beckman Coulter, Kowa Pharmaceuticals, and Tosoh Biosciences. Dr Bohula has received consulting fees from Novo Nordisk and Kowa Pharmaceuticals. Dr Morrow has received consulting fees from Abbott Laboratories, InCarda, Merck, Novartis, Regeneron, and Roche Diagnostics. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Objective: The association of prior to admission guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) use in patients hospitalized with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction (HFrEF, ejection fraction ≤40 %) and Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) with in-hospital outcomes has not been well studied., Design/setting/participants/interventions/outcome Measures: Using the American Heart Association's Get With The Guidelines Heart Failure Registry, we identified HFrEF patients presenting with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) and compared rates of GDMT prescription between those presenting prior to and during the pandemic. In a subgroup of patients with a concomitant COVID-19 diagnosis, we evaluated the association of prior to admission GDMT use with in-hospital mortality and severe COVID-19., Results: 23,899 patients were admitted with HFrEF during the pandemic (2/16/20-3/24/21) and 26,459 patients were admitted in the year prior (2/16/19-2/15/20). In this overall cohort, prior to admission ACEI/ARB/ARNI (45.6 % vs 48.1 %, p < 0.0001) and BB (56.9 % vs 62.4 %, p < 0.0001) use was lower among admitted HFrEF patients during the pandemic when compared to the year prior. Rates of ACEI/ARB/ARNI, MRA, and triple therapy (ACE/ARB/ARNI + BB + MRA) prescription at discharge were higher during the pandemic compared to the year prior. Among a subgroup of those with HFrEF and COVID-19 (n = 333), prior to admission GDMT use was not associated with in-hospital mortality or severe COVID-19., Conclusion: We found no association between prior to admission GDMT use and in-hospital mortality or severe COVID-19 among HFrEF patients admitted with ADHF and COVID-19. GDMT prescription at discharge for HFrEF patients overall has remained either similar or improved during the pandemic., Competing Interests: The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: GCF reports consulting for Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Cytokinetics, Edwards, Eli Lilly, Johnson&Johnson, Medtronic, Merck, Novartis, and Pfizer. EHY reports research grants/funding from CSL Behring, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, and Bristol Meyers Squibb, and consulting fees from Pfizer. LBD reports consulting for Abbott, Quidel, and Roche; research funding from Vifor; and serves on a clinical endpoint adjudication committee for Applied Therapeutics. RVP receives unrelated research support from Infraredx, Abbott Vascular, and Bayer, and consulting fees from Abbott Vascular., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Background: Sex disparities exist in the management and outcomes of various cardiovascular diseases. However, little is known about sex differences in cardiogenic shock (CS). We sought to assess sex-related differences in the characteristics, resource utilization, and outcomes of patients with CS., Methods: The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network is a multicenter registry of advanced cardiac intensive care units (CICUs) in North America. Between 2018 and 2022, each center (N=35) contributed annual 2-month snapshots of consecutive CICU admissions. Patients with CS were stratified as either CS after acute myocardial infarction or heart failure-related CS (HF-CS). Multivariable logistic regression was used for analyses., Results: Of the 22 869 admissions in the overall population, 4505 (20%) had CS. Among 3923 patients with CS due to ventricular failure (32% female), 1235 (31%) had CS after acute myocardial infarction and 2688 (69%) had HF-CS. Median sequential organ failure assessment scores did not differ by sex. Women with HF-CS had shorter CICU lengths of stay (4.5 versus 5.4 days; P <0.0001) and shorter overall lengths of hospital stay (10.9 versus 12.8 days; P <0.0001) than men. Women with HF-CS were less likely to receive pulmonary artery catheters (50% versus 55%; P <0.01) and mechanical circulatory support (26% versus 34%; P <0.0001) compared with men. Women with HF-CS had higher in-hospital mortality than men, even after adjusting for age, illness severity, and comorbidities (34% versus 23%; odds ratio, 1.76 [95% CI, 1.42-2.17]). In contrast, there were no significant sex differences in utilization of advanced CICU monitoring and interventions, or mortality, among patients with CS after acute myocardial infarction., Conclusions: Women with HF-CS had lower use of pulmonary artery catheters and mechanical circulatory support, shorter CICU lengths of stay, and higher in-hospital mortality than men, even after accounting for age, illness severity, and comorbidities. These data highlight the need to identify underlying reasons driving the differences in treatment decisions, so outcomes gaps in HF-CS can be understood and eliminated., Competing Interests: Drs Berg, Bohula, Park, and Morrow are members of the TIMI Study Group, which has received institutional research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, ARCA Biopharma, Inc, AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Intarcia, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Janssen Research and Development, LLC, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Quark Pharmaceuticals, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Roche, Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Inc, Softcell Medical Ltd, The Medicines Company, and Zora Biosciences. Dr Katz reports modest research funding from Abbott Corporation. The other authors report no conflicts.

Background: Previous studies have suggested that there is wide variability in cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) length of stay (LOS); however, these studies are limited by the absence of detailed risk assessment at the time of admission. Thus, we evaluated inter-hospital differences in CICU LOS, and the association between LOS and in-hospital mortality., Methods: Using data from the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network (CCCTN) registry, we included 22,862 admissions between 2017 and 2022 from 35 primarily tertiary and quaternary CICUs that captured consecutive admissions in annual 2-month snapshots. The primary analysis compared inter-hospital differences in CICU LOS, as well as the association between CICU LOS and all-cause in-hospital mortality using a Fine and Gray competing risk model., Results: The overall median CICU LOS was 2.2 (1.1-4.8) days, and the median hospital LOS was 5.9 (2.8-12.3) days. Admissions in the longest tertile of LOS tended to be younger with higher rates of pre-existing comorbidities, and had higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores, as well as higher rates of mechanical ventilation, intravenous vasopressor use, mechanical circulatory support, and renal replacement therapy. Unadjusted all-cause in-hospital mortality was 9.3%, 6.7%, and 13.4% in the lowest, intermediate, and highest CICU LOS tertiles. In a competing risk analysis, individual patient CICU LOS was correlated (r 2 = 0.31) with a higher risk of 30-day in-hospital mortality. The relationship remained significant in admissions with heart failure, ST-elevation myocardial infarction and non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction., Conclusions: In a large registry of academic CICUs, we observed significant variation in CICU LOS and report that LOS is independently associated with all-cause in-hospital mortality. These findings could potentially be used to improve CICU resource utilization planning and refine risk prognostication in critically ill cardiovascular patients., Competing Interests: Disclosure DMK, MWD, DAG, DH, SL, MJP, SWR, PAS, JS JW, LBD, SvD, none. JNK reports 1) Research support from Abbott and as a data safety and monitoring committee member for Abiomed; RP reports consulting fees from Abiomed; LKN reports research funding and consulting from Medtronic and research funding from Roche Diagnostics. EAB/DAM/JGP are members of the TIMI Study Group which has received institutional research grant support through Brigham and Women's Hospital from Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, ARCA Biopharma, Inc., AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Intarcia, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Janssen Research and Development, LLC, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Quark Pharmaceuticals, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Roche, Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Inc., Softcell Medical Limited, The Medicines Company, Zora Biosciences. DAM has received consulting fees from Abbott Laboratories, ARCA Biopharma, InCarda, Inflammatix, Merck, Novartis and Roche Diagnostics., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Risk stratification has potential to guide triage and decision-making in cardiogenic shock (CS). We assessed the prognostic performance of the IABP-SHOCK II score, derived in Europe for acute myocardial infarct-related CS (AMI-CS), in a contemporary North American cohort, including different CS phenotypes., Methods: The critical care cardiology trials network (CCCTN) coordinated by the TIMI study group is a multicenter network of cardiac intensive care units (CICU). Participating centers annually contribute ≥2 months of consecutive medical CICU admissions. The IABP-SHOCK II risk score includes age > 73 years, prior stroke, admission glucose > 191 mg/dl, creatinine > 1.5 mg/dl, lactate > 5 mmol/l, and post-PCI TIMI flow grade < 3. We assessed the risk score across various CS etiologies., Results: Of 17,852 medical CICU admissions 5,340 patients across 35 sites were admitted with CS. In patients with AMI-CS (n = 912), the IABP-SHOCK II score predicted a >3-fold gradient in in-hospital mortality (low risk = 26.5%, intermediate risk = 52.2%, high risk = 77.5%, P < .0001; c-statistic = 0.67; Hosmer-Lemeshow P = .79). The score showed a similar gradient of in-hospital mortality in patients with non-AMI-related CS (n = 2,517, P < .0001) and mixed shock (n = 923, P < .001), as well as in left ventricular (<0.0001), right ventricular (P = .0163) or biventricular (<0.0001) CS. The correlation between the IABP-SHOCK II score and SOFA was moderate (r 2 = 0.17) and the IABP-SHOCK II score revealed a significant risk gradient within each SCAI stage., Conclusions: In an unselected international multicenter registry of patients admitted with CS, the IABP- SHOCK II score only moderately predicted in-hospital mortality in a broad population of CS regardless of etiology or irrespective of right, left, or bi-ventricular involvement., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Wide interhospital variations exist in cardiovascular intensive care unit (CICU) admission practices and the use of critical care restricted therapies (CCRx), but little is known about the differences in patient acuity, CCRx utilization, and the associated outcomes within tertiary centers., Methods: The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network is a multicenter registry of tertiary and academic CICUs in the United States and Canada that captured consecutive admissions in 2-month periods between 2017 and 2022. This analysis included 17 843 admissions across 34 sites and compared interhospital tertiles of CCRx (eg, mechanical ventilation, mechanical circulatory support, continuous renal replacement therapy) utilization and its adjusted association with in-hospital survival using logistic regression. The Pratt index was used to quantify patient-related and institutional factors associated with CCRx variability., Results: The median age of the study population was 66 (56-77) years and 37% were female. CCRx was provided to 62.2% (interhospital range of 21.3%-87.1%) of CICU patients. Admissions to CICUs with the highest tertile of CCRx utilization had a greater burden of comorbidities, had more diagnoses of ST-elevation myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, or cardiogenic shock, and had higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores. The unadjusted in-hospital mortality (median, 12.7%) was 9.6%, 11.1%, and 18.7% in low, intermediate, and high CCRx tertiles, respectively. No clinically meaningful differences in adjusted mortality were observed across tertiles when admissions were stratified by the provision of CCRx. Baseline patient-level variables and institutional differences accounted for 80% and 5.3% of the observed CCRx variability, respectively., Conclusions: In a large registry of tertiary and academic CICUs, there was a >4-fold interhospital variation in the provision of CCRx that was primarily driven by differences in patient acuity compared with institutional differences. No differences were observed in adjusted mortality between low, intermediate, and high CCRx utilization sites., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Barnett reports clinical trial enrollment for Acceleron, Merck, Merck Shape & Dohme, and Aerovate Therapeutics. Dr Bohula, Dr Morrow, and J. Guo are members of the TIMI study group, which has received institutional research grant support through Brigham and Women’s Hospital from Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, ARCA Biopharma, Inc, AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Intarcia, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Janssen Research and Development, LLC, MedImmune, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Quark Pharmaceuticals, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Roche, Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Inc, Softcell Medical Limited, The Medicines Company, and Zora Biosciences. Dr Morrow has received consulting fees from Abbott Laboratories, ARCA Biopharma, InCarda, Inflammatix, Merck, Novartis, and Roche Diagnostics. Dr Daniels reports consulting income from Roche Diagnostics and QuidelOrtho serves on clinical end point adjudication committees for Abbottand Applied Therapeutics. Dr Prasad reports advisory board for Abiomed and NIH R01 grant. Dr Teuteberg reports consulting with Abbott, Abiomed advisory board, CareDx advisory board and speaking fees, Cytokinetics speaking fees, Medtronic advisory board, speaking and consulting fees, Paragonix speaking fees, and Takeda advisory board. The other authors report no conflicts.