Search

Patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS)-related cardiogenic shock (CS) with or without concomitant CA may have disparate prognoses. We compared clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with CS secondary to ACS with and without cardiac arrest (CA). Between 2014 and 2020, 1,573 patients with ACS-related CS with or without CA who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention enrolled in a multicenter Australian registry were analyzed. Primary outcome was 30-day major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (composite of mortality, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, target vessel revascularization and stroke). Long-term mortality was obtained through linkage to the National Death Index. Compared with the no-CA group (n = 769, 49%), the CA group (n = 804, 51%) was younger (62 vs 69 years, p <0.001) and had fewer comorbidities. Patients with CA more frequently had ST-elevation myocardial infarction (92% vs 86%), occluded left anterior descending artery (43% vs 33%), and severe preprocedural renal impairment (49% vs 42%) (all p <0.001). CA increased risk of 30-day MACCE by 45% (odds ratio 1.45, 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 2.00, p = 0.024) after adjustment. CA group had higher 30-day MACCE (55% vs 42%, p <0.001) and mortality (52% vs 37%, p <0.001). Three-year survival was lower for CA compared with no-CA patients (43% vs 52%, p <0.001). In Cox regression, CS with CA was associated with a trend toward greater long-term mortality hazard (hazard ratio 1.19, 95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.41, p = 0.055). In conclusion, concomitant CA among patients with ACS-related CS conferred a particularly heightened short-term risk with a diminishing legacy effect over time for mortality. CS survivors continue to exhibit high sustained long-term mortality hazard regardless of CA status., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, particularly in patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class IV symptoms. Decades of discovery have heralded significant advancements in the pharmacologic management of HFrEF. However, patients with NYHA IV symptoms remain an under-represented population in almost every clinical trial to date, leaving clinicians with limited evidence with which to guide drug treatment decisions in this patient group with severe heart failure. Randomized controlled trials of adult patients with NYHA IV symptoms of HFrEF randomized to current guideline-recommended medical therapy were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The outcomes of interest included the rate of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and heart failure hospitalization. A total of 39 randomized controlled trials were included. A total of 6 studies examined angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, with meta-analyses of 2 demonstrating a reduced risk of all-cause mortality (relative risk (RR) 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 0.97, p = 0.03). A total of 11 studies examined β blockers, with meta-analysis of 6 demonstrating a reduced risk of all-cause mortality (risk ratio 0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.60 to 0.92, p = 0.008). A study examined the mineralocorticoid antagonist spironolactone, reporting a reduced risk of all-cause mortality in the NYHA IV subgroup. A total of 6 studies examined device therapy, demonstrating the benefit of cardiac resynchronization therapy with or without an implantable cardiac defibrillator in reducing hospitalization in the NYHA IV subgroup. Although trial evidence exists for angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, β-blockers, and mineralocorticoid antagonist therapy in the NYHA IV population, the role of angiotensin receptor blockers is unclear. Ivabradine, angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, and sodium-glucose transport protein 2 inhibitors remain underinvestigated and have not been proved to provide any benefit above standard heart failure therapy in patients with HFrEF and NYHA IV symptoms., Competing Interests: Disclosures The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Crown Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Characteristics of patients presenting with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) selected for coronary angiography (CA) and factors predicting in-hospital mortality remain unclear. We assessed clinical characteristics associated with undertaking CA in patients presenting with OHCA and shockable rhythm (CA group). Predictors of in-hospital mortality were evaluated with multivariable analysis. Of 1,552 patients presenting with cardiac arrest between 2014 and 2018 to 2 health services in Victoria, Australia, 213 patients with OHCA and shockable rhythm were stratified according to CA status. The CA group had shorter cardiopulmonary resuscitation duration (17 vs 25 minutes) and time to return of spontaneous circulation (17 vs 26 minutes) but higher proportion of ST-elevation on electrocardiogram (48% vs 24%) (all p <0.01). In-hospital mortality was 38% (n = 81) for the overall cohort, 32% (n = 54) in the CA group, and 61% (n = 27) in the no-CA group. Predictors of in-hospital mortality included non-selection for CA (odds ratio 4.5, 95% confidence interval 1.5 to 14), adrenaline support (3.9, 1.3 to 12), arrest at home (2.7, 1.1 to 6.6), longer time to defibrillation (2.5, 1.5 to 4.2 per 5-minute increase), lower blood pH (2.1, 1.4 to 3.2 per 0.1 decrease), lower albumin (2.0, 1.2 to 3.3 per 5 g/L decrease), higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score (1.7, 1.0 to 3.0 per 5-point increase), and advanced age (1.4, 1.0 to 2.0 per 10-year increase) (all p ≤0.05). In conclusion, non-selection for CA, concomitant cardiogenic shock requiring inotropic support, poor initial resuscitation (arrest at home, longer time to defibrillation and lower pH), greater burden of co-morbidities (higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score and lower albumin), and advanced age were key adverse prognostic indicators among patients with OHCA and shockable rhythm., Competing Interests: Disclosures The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

International guidelines suggest revascularization within 24 hours in non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). Within a large population cohort study, we aimed to explore clinical practice regarding timing targets for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in NSTEMI. The Victorian Cardiac Outcomes Registry was established in 2013 as a state-wide clinical quality registry, pooling data from public and private PCI capable centers. Data were collected on 11,852 PCIs performed for NSTEMI from 2014 to 2018. Patients were divided into 3 groups by time of symptom onset to PCI (<24 hours; 24 to 72 hours; >72 hours). We performed multivariable logistic regression analysis conditional on several baseline covariates in investigating the impact of timing of PCI in NSTEMI on clinical outcomes. Patients who underwent PCI within 24 hours represented 18.4% (n = 2,178); 24 to 72 hours 45.8% (n = 5,434); >72 hours 35.8% (n = 4,240). Patients waiting longer for PCI were older (62.6 ± 12.2 vs 64.8 ± 12.6 vs 67.0 ± 12.7, p <0.001), more likely to be female (23.1% vs 24.2% vs 26.4%, p = 0.007), and have diabetes (18.6% vs 21.1% vs 27.1%, p <0.001). Multivariate logistic regression found that as compared with PCI <24 hours, PCI 24 to 72 hours and PCI >72 hours of symptom onset were associated with a decreased risk of 30-day mortality (odds ratio 0.55; 95% confidence interval 0.35 to 0.86, p = 0.008 and odds ratio 0.64; 95% confidence interval 0.35 to 1.01, p = 0.053, respectively). There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality between groups following exclusion of patients presenting with cardiogenic shock or out of hospital cardiac arrest requiring intubation. In conclusion, many registry patients undergo PCI outside the 24-hour window following NSTEMI. This delay is at odds with current guideline recommendations but does not appear to be associated with an increased mortality risk., (Crown Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)