Search

Background A growing population of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) presents with non–ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction, although little is known about their longer‐term mortality. Methods and Results Using the MINAP (Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project) registry, linked to Office for National Statistics mortality data, we analyzed 363 559 UK patients with non–ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction, with or without CKD. Cox regression models were fitted, adjusting for baseline demographics. Compared with patients without CKD, patients with CKD were less frequently prescribed P2Y12 inhibitors (89% versus 86%, P

Abstract Aims Prognosis for ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is worse when heart failure is present on admission. Understanding clinical practice in different health systems can identify areas for quality improvement initiatives to improve outcomes. In the absence of international comparison studies, we aimed to compare treatments and in‐hospital outcomes of patients admitted with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) by heart failure status in two healthcare‐wide cohorts. Methods and results We used two nationwide databases to capture admissions with STEMI in the United Kingdom (Myocardial ischemia National Audit Project, MINAP) and Japan (Japanese Registry of All Cardiac and Vascular Diseases‐Diagnostic Procedure Combination, JROAD‐DPC) between 2012 and 2017. Participants were stratified using the HF Killip classification into three groups; Killip 1: no congestive heart failure, Killip 2–3: congestive heart failure, Killip 4: cardiogenic shock. We calculated crude rate and case mix standardized risk ratios (CSRR) for use of treatments and in‐hospital death. Patients were younger in the United Kingdom (65.4 [13.6] vs. 69.1 [13.0] years) and more likely to have co‐morbidities in the United Kingdom except for diabetes and hypertension. Japan had a higher percentage of heart failure and cardiogenic shock patients among STEMI during admission than that in the United Kingdom. Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) rates were lower in the United Kingdom compared with Japan, especially for patients presenting with Killip 2–3 class heart failure (pPCI use in patients with Killip 1, 2–3, 4: Japan, 86.2%, 81.7%, 78.7%; United Kingdom, 79.6%, 58.2% and 79.9%). In contrast, beta‐blocker use was consistently lower in Japan than in the United Kingdom (61.4% vs. 90.2%) across Killip classifications and length of hospital stay longer (17.0 [9.7] vs. 5.0 [7.4] days). The crude rate of in‐hospital mortality increased with increasing Killip class group. Both the crude rate and CSRR was higher in the United Kingdom compared with Japan for Killip 2–3 (15.8% vs. 6.4%, CSRR 1.80 95% CI 1.73–1.87, P

Abstract Background Medicines are often suboptimally managed for heart failure patients across the transition from hospital to home, potentially leading to poor patient outcomes. The Improving the Safety and Continuity Of Medicines management at Transitions of care programme included: understanding the problems faced by patients and healthcare professionals; developing and co‐designing the Medicines at Transitions of care Intervention (MaTI); a cluster randomized controlled trial testing the effectiveness of a complex behavioural MaTI aimed at improving medicines management at the interface between hospitals discharge and community care for patients with heart failure; and a process evaluation. The MaTI included a patient‐held My Medicines Toolkit; enhanced communication between the hospital and the patient's community pharmacist and increased engagement of the community pharmacist postdischarge. This paper reports on the patients' experiences of the MaTI and its implementation from the process evaluation. Design Twenty one‐to‐one semi‐structured patient interviews from six intervention sites were conducted between November 2018 and January 2020. Data were analysed using the Framework method, involving patients as co‐analysts. Interview data were triangulated with routine trial data, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and a logic model. Results Within the hospital setting patients engaged with the toolkit according to whether staff raised awareness of the My Medicines Toolkit's importance and the time and place of its introduction. Patients' engagement with community pharmacy depended on their awareness of the community pharmacist's role, support sources and perceptions of involvement in medicines management. The toolkit's impact on patients' medicines management at home included reassurance during gaps in care, increased knowledge of medicines, enhanced ability to monitor health and seek support and supporting sharing medicines management between formal and informal care networks. Conclusion Many patients perceived that the MaTI offered them support in their medicines management when transitioning from hospital into the community. Importantly, it can be incorporated into and built upon patients' lived experiences of heart failure. Key to its successful implementation is the quality of engagement of healthcare professionals in introducing the intervention. Patient or Public Contribution Patients were involved in the study design, as qualitative data co‐analysts and as co‐authors.

Background Studies have reported significant reduction in acute myocardial infarction–related hospitalizations during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic. However, whether these trends are associated with increased incidence of out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in this population is unknown. Methods and Results Acute myocardial infarction hospitalizations with OHCA during the COVID‐19 period (February 1–May 14, 2020) from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project and British Cardiovascular Intervention Society data sets were analyzed. Temporal trends were assessed using Poisson models with equivalent pre–COVID‐19 period (February 1–May 14, 2019) as reference. Acute myocardial infarction hospitalizations during COVID‐19 period were reduced by >50% (n=20 310 versus n=9325). OHCA was more prevalent during the COVID‐19 period compared with the pre–COVID‐19 period (5.6% versus 3.6%), with a 56% increase in the incidence of OHCA (incidence rate ratio, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.39–1.74). Patients experiencing OHCA during COVID‐19 period were likely to be older, likely to be women, likely to be of Asian ethnicity, and more likely to present with ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction. The overall rates of invasive coronary angiography (58.4% versus 71.6%; P

Background Bleeding risk stratification in acute coronary syndrome is of highest clinical interest but current risk scores have limitations. We sought to develop and validate a new in‐hospital bleeding risk score for patients with acute myocardial infarction. Methods and Results From the nationwide SWEDEHEART (Swedish Web‐System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence‐Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies) register, 97,597 patients with acute myocardial infarction enrolled from 2009 until 2014 were selected. A full model with 23 predictor variables and 8 interaction terms was fitted using logistic regression. The full model was approximated by a model with 5 predictors and 1 interaction term. Calibration, discrimination, and clinical utility was evaluated and compared with the ACTION (Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network) and CRUSADE (Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress Adverse Outcomes With Early Implementation of the ACC/AHA Guidelines) scores. Internal and temporal validity was assessed. In‐hospital major bleeding, defined as fatal, intracranial, or requiring surgery or blood transfusion, occurred in 1356 patients (1.4%). The 5 predictors in the approximate model that constituted the SWEDEHEART score were hemoglobin, age, sex, creatinine, and C‐reactive protein. The ACTION and CRUSADE scores were poorly calibrated in the derivation cohort and therefore were recalibrated. The SWEDEHEART score showed higher discriminative ability than both recalibrated scores, overall (C‐index 0.80 versus 0.73/0.72) and in all predefined subgroups. Decision curve analysis demonstrated consistently positive and higher net benefit for the SWEDEHEART score compared with both recalibrated scores across all clinically relevant decision thresholds. The original ACTION and CRUSADE scores showed negative net benefit. Conclusions The 5‐item SWEDEHEART score discriminates in‐hospital major bleeding in patients with acute myocardial infarction and has superior model performance compared with the recalibrated ACTION and CRUSADE scores.

BackgroundThis study assessed sex differences in treatments, all‐cause mortality, relative survival, and excess mortality following acute myocardial infarction. Methods and ResultsA population‐based cohort of all hospitals providing acute myocardial infarction care in Sweden (SWEDEHEART [Swedish Web System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence‐Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies]) from 2003 to 2013 was included in the analysis. Excess mortality rate ratios (EMRRs), adjusted for clinical characteristics and guideline‐indicated treatments after matching by age, sex, and year to background mortality data, were estimated. Although there were no sex differences in all‐cause mortality adjusted for age, year of hospitalization, and comorbidities for ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non‐STEMI at 1 year (mortality rate ratio: 1.01 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.96–1.05] and 0.97 [95% CI, 0.95–0.99], respectively) and 5 years (mortality rate ratio: 1.03 [95% CI, 0.99–1.07] and 0.97 [95% CI, 0.95–0.99], respectively), excess mortality was higher among women compared with men for STEMI and non‐STEMI at 1 year (EMRR: 1.89 [95% CI, 1.66–2.16] and 1.20 [95% CI, 1.16–1.24], respectively) and 5 years (EMRR: 1.60 [95% CI, 1.48–1.72] and 1.26 [95% CI, 1.21–1.32], respectively). After further adjustment for the use of guideline‐indicated treatments, excess mortality among women with non‐STEMI was not significant at 1 year (EMRR: 1.01 [95% CI, 0.97–1.04]) and slightly higher at 5 years (EMRR: 1.07 [95% CI, 1.02–1.12]). For STEMI, adjustment for treatments attenuated the excess mortality for women at 1 year (EMRR: 1.43 [95% CI, 1.26–1.62]) and 5 years (EMRR: 1.31 [95% CI, 1.19–1.43]). ConclusionsWomen with acute myocardial infarction did not have statistically different all‐cause mortality, but had higher excess mortality compared with men that was attenuated after adjustment for the use of guideline‐indicated treatments. This suggests that improved adherence to guideline recommendations for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction may reduce premature cardiovascular death among women. Clinical Trial RegistrationURL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02952417.

BackgroundTranscatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is indicated for patients with aortic stenosis who are intermediate‐high surgical risk. Although all‐cause mortality rates after TAVI are established, survival attributable to the procedure is unclear because of competing causes of mortality. The aim was to report relative survival (RS) after TAVI, which accounts for background mortality risks in a matched general population. Methods and ResultsNational cohort data (n=6420) from the 2007 to 2014 UK TAVI registry were matched by age, sex, and year to mortality rates for England and Wales (population, 57.9 million). The Ederer II method related observed patient survival to that expected from the matched general population. We modelled RS using a flexible parametric approach that modelled the log cumulative hazard using restricted cubic splines. RS of the TAVI cohort was 95.4%, 90.2%, and 83.8% at 30 days, 1 year, and 3 years, respectively. By 1‐year follow‐up, mortality hazards in the >85 years age group were not significantly different from those of the matched general population; by 3 years, survival rates were comparable. The flexible parametric RS model indicated that increasing age was associated with significantly lower excess hazards after the procedure; for example, by 2 years, a 5‐year increase in age was associated with 20% lower excess mortality over the general population. ConclusionsRS after TAVI was high, and survival rates in those aged >85 years approximated those of a matched general population within 3 years. High rates of RS indicate that patients selected for TAVI tolerate the risks of the procedure well.