Search

Peripheral vascular disease affects millions of individuals worldwide, and results in significant morbidity and mortality. The complex nature of the disease, the presence of multiple comorbidities, and the existence of a wide variety of therapeutic options suggests that a multidisciplinary approach to treatment has the potential to improve care of these patients. The success of the heart team for complex coronary artery and structural heart disease could serve as a model for the efficient and effective management of patients with peripheral vascular disease. In this paper, the authors propose a multidisciplinary vascular team approach for the treatment of critical limb ischemia, pulmonary embolism, acute ischemic stroke, and acute aortic syndromes. The successful implementation of such vascular teams has the potential to significantly enhance quality of care, improve clinical outcomes, and reduce costs. Prospective evaluation is warranted to determine how to best integrate this approach into routine clinical care., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: It is not clear how often patients receive aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) while receiving oral anticoagulation with warfarin sodium without a clear therapeutic indication for aspirin, such as a mechanical heart valve replacement, recent percutaneous coronary intervention, or acute coronary syndrome. The clinical outcomes of such patients treated with warfarin and aspirin therapy compared with warfarin monotherapy are not well defined to date., Objective: To evaluate the frequency and outcomes of adding aspirin to warfarin for patients without a clear therapeutic indication for combination therapy., Design, Setting, and Participants: A registry-based cohort study of adults enrolled at 6 anticoagulation clinics in Michigan (January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2017) who were receiving warfarin therapy for atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism without documentation of a recent myocardial infarction or history of valve replacement., Exposure: Aspirin use without therapeutic indication., Main Outcomes and Measures: Rates of any bleeding, major bleeding events, emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and thrombotic events at 1, 2, and 3 years., Results: Of the study cohort of 6539 patients (3326 men [50.9%]; mean [SD] age, 66.1 [15.5] years), 2453 patients (37.5%) without a clear therapeutic indication for aspirin were receiving combination warfarin and aspirin therapy. Data from 2 propensity score-matched cohorts of 1844 patients were analyzed (warfarin and aspirin vs warfarin only). At 1 year, patients receiving combination warfarin and aspirin compared with those receiving warfarin only had higher rates of overall bleeding (cumulative incidence, 26.0%; 95% CI, 23.8%-28.3% vs 20.3%; 95% CI, 18.3%-22.3%; P < .001), major bleeding (5.7%; 95% CI, 4.6%-7.1% vs 3.3%; 95% CI, 2.4%-4.3%; P < .001), emergency department visits for bleeding (13.3%; 95% CI, 11.6%-15.1% vs 9.8%; 95% CI, 8.4%-11.4%; P = .001), and hospitalizations for bleeding (8.1%; 6.8%-9.6% vs 5.2%; 4.1%-6.4%; P = .001). Rates of thrombosis were similar, with a 1-year cumulative incidence of 2.3% (95% CI, 1.6%-3.1%) for those receiving combination warfarin and aspirin therapy compared with 2.7% (95% CI, 2.0%-3.6%) for those receiving warfarin alone (P = .40). Similar findings persisted during 3 years of follow-up as well as in sensitivity analyses., Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with warfarin monotherapy, receipt of combination warfarin and aspirin therapy was associated with increased bleeding and similar observed rates of thrombosis. Further research is needed to better stratify which patients may benefit from aspirin while anticoagulated with warfarin for atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism; clinicians should be judicious in selecting patients for combination therapy.

Use of bridging anticoagulation has been shown to be harmful and without benefit in warfarin-treated patients with atrial fibrillation. We performed a quasi-experimental interrupted time series analysis between 2010 and 2017 in the Michigan Anticoagulation Quality Improvement Initiative (MAQI 2 ) collaborative before and after the BRIDGE trial publication (July 2015). Predicted use of bridging at the end of the study period was calculated with and without the effect of the BRIDGE trial after adjustment for patient-level clustering. Predictors of bridging anticoagulation use in the post-BRIDGE trial period were analyzed. In adjusted analyses, the use of bridging anticoagulation declined from a predicted 27.8% (95% confidence interval, 20.5%-35.1%) to 13.6% (95% confidence interval, 9.0%-18.2%) at the end of 2017 (P = .001) in response to the BRIDGE trial. Use of bridging anticoagulation declined similarly among atrial fibrillation patients at low risk for stroke (29.0% to 14.4%) and intermediate or high risk for stroke (38.0%-20.3%). Younger age and a prior history of stroke were independent predictors of bridging anticoagulation use following the BRIDGE trial publication. The BRIDGE trial publication is associated with a rapid and significant decline in the use of periprocedural bridging anticoagulation., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Outpatient anticoagulation clinics were initially developed to care for patients taking vitamin K antagonists such as warfarin. There has not been a systematic evaluation of the barriers and facilitators to integrating direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) care into outpatient anticoagulation clinics., Methods: We performed a mixed methods study consisting of an online survey of anticoagulation clinic providers and semi-structured interviews with anticoagulation clinic leaders and managers between March and May of 2017. Interviews were transcribed and coded, exploring for themes around barriers and facilitators to DOAC care within anticoagulation clinics. Survey questions pertaining to the specific themes identified in the interviews were analyzed using summary statistics., Results: Survey responses were collected from 159 unique anticoagulation clinics and 20 semi-structured interviews were conducted. Three primary barriers to DOAC care in the anticoagulation clinic were described by the interviewees: (a) a lack of provider awareness for ongoing monitoring and services provided by the anticoagulation clinic; (b) financial challenges to providing care to DOAC patients in an anticoagulation clinic model; and (c) clinical knowledge versus scope of care by the anticoagulation staff. These themes linked to three key areas of variation, including: (a) the size and hospital affiliation of the anticoagulation clinic; (b) the use of face-to-face versus telephone-based care; and (c) the use of nurses or pharmacists in the anticoagulation clinic., Conclusions: Anticoagulation clinics in the United States experience important barriers to integrating DOAC care. These barriers vary based on the clinic size, model for warfarin care, and staff credentials (nursing or pharmacy).

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining warfarin use for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) may not accurately reflect real-world populations. We aimed to determine the representativeness of the RCT populations to real-world patients and to describe differences in the characteristics of trial populations from trial eligible patients in a real-world setting. We hypothesized that a significant fraction of real-world patients would not qualify for the RE-LY, ROCKET-AF, and ARISTOTLE trials and that real-world patients qualifying for the studies may have more strokes and bleeding events. We compared the inclusion and exclusion criteria, patient characteristics, and clinical outcomes from RE-LY, ROCKET-AF, and ARISTOTLE against data from the Michigan Anticoagulation Quality Improvement Initiative (MAQI 2 ), a regional network of six community- and academic-based anticoagulation clinics. Of the 1446 non-valvular AF patients in the MAQI 2 registry taking warfarin, approximately 40-60% would meet the selection criteria used in RE-LY (788, 54.5%), ROCKET-AF (566, 39.1%), and ARISTOTLE (866, 59.9%). The most common reasons for exclusion from one or more trial were anemia (15.1%), other concurrent medications (11.2%), and chronic kidney disease (9.4%). Trial-eligible MAQI 2 patients were older, more frequently female, with a higher rate of paroxysmal AF, and lower rates of congestive heart failure, previous stroke, and previous myocardial infarction than the trial populations. MAQI 2 patients eligible for each trial had a lower rate of stroke and similar rate of major bleeding than was observed in the trials. A sizable proportion of real-world AF patients managed in anticoagulation clinics would not have been eligible for the RE-LY, ROCKET-AF, and ARISOTLE trials. The expected stroke risk reduction and bleeding risk among real-world AF patients on warfarin may not be congruent with published clinical trial data.

Importance: Fibromuscular dysplasia (FMD) is a nonatherosclerotic arterial disease that predominately affects women and is most commonly diagnosed in middle age. The natural history of FMD among patients diagnosed at an older age is not well understood., Objective: To examine the differences in clinical presentation, arterial bed involvement, vascular events, and need for vascular procedures between younger and older patients with FMD., Design, Setting, and Participants: Analysis of baseline data for patients enrolled in the US Registry for FMD as of December 15, 2016, at referral centers participating in the US Registry for FMD. Patients 18 years and older at the time of enrollment and those with only confirmed multifocal (string of beads type) FMD were included. Patients were categorized according to age at the time of diagnosis (≥65 years vs <65 years)., Main Outcomes and Measures: Prevalence of specific symptoms, vascular events, and prior vascular procedures at the time of enrollment in the registry., Results: A total of 1016 patients were included in the analysis, of whom, 170 (16.7%) were 65 years or older at the time of diagnosis. Older patients with FMD were more likely to be asymptomatic at the time of diagnosis (4.2% vs 1.4%; P = .02). Headache and pulsatile tinnitus, both common manifestations of FMD, were less common in older patients (40.5% vs 69.1%; P < .001 and 30% vs 44.6%; P < .001, respectively). Extracranial carotid arteries were more commonly involved in patients 65 years or older at time of diagnosis (87% vs 79.4%; P = .03). There was no difference in prevalence of renal artery involvement, number of arterial beds involved, or diagnosis of any aneurysm. Patients 65 years or older were less likely to have had a major vascular event (37.1% vs 46.1%; P = .03) and fewer had undergone a therapeutic vascular procedure (18.5% vs 33.1%; P < .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: In the US Registry for FMD, patients 65 years or older at the time of diagnosis of multifocal FMD were more likely to be asymptomatic, had lower prevalence of major vascular events, and had undergone fewer therapeutic vascular procedures than younger patients. Patients with multifocal FMD diagnosed at an older age may have a more benign phenotype and fewer symptoms.

Many anticoagulation clinics have adapted their services to provide care for patients taking direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) in addition to traditional warfarin management. Anticoagulation clinic scope of service and operations in this transitional environment have not been well described in the literature. A survey was conducted of United States-based Anticoagulation Forum members to inquire about anticoagulation clinic structure, function, and services provided. Survey responses are reported using summary or non-parametric statistics, when appropriate. Unique clinic survey responses were received from 159 anticoagulation clinics. Clinic structure and staffing are highly variable, with approximately half of clinics (52%) providing DOAC-focused care in addition to traditional warfarin-focused care. Of those clinics managing DOAC patients, this accounts for only 10% of their clinic volume. These clinics commonly have a DOAC follow up protocol (75%). Clinics assign a median of 190.5 (interquartile range 50-300) patients per staff full-time-equivalent, with more patients assigned in phone-based care clinics than in face-to-face based care clinics. Most clinics (68.5%) report receiving reimbursement, which occur either through a combination of patient and insurance provider billing (78.2%), insurance reimbursement only (19.5%) or patient reimbursement only (2.3%). There is wide heterogeneity in anticoagulation clinic structure, function, and services provided. Half of all survey-responding anticoagulation clinics provide care for DOAC-treated patients. Understanding how changes in healthcare policy and reimbursement have impacted these clinics remains to be explored.

Essentials Warfarin typically requires International Normalized Ratio (INR) testing at least every 4 weeks. We implemented extended INR testing for stable warfarin patients in six anticoagulation clinics. Use of extended INR testing increased from 41.8% to 69.3% over the 3 year study. Use of extended INR testing appeared safe and effective., Summary: Background A previous single-center randomized trial suggested that patients with stable International Normalized Ratio (INR) values could safely receive INR testing as infrequently as every 12 weeks. Objective To test the success of implementation of an extended INR testing interval for stable warfarin patients in a practice-based, multicenter collaborative of anticoagulation clinics. Methods At six anticoagulation clinics, patients were identified as being eligible for extended INR testing on the basis of prior INR value stability and minimal warfarin dose changes between 2014 and 2016. We assessed the frequency with which anticoagulation clinic providers recommended an extended INR testing interval (> 5 weeks) to eligible patients. We also explored safety outcomes for eligible patients, including next INR values, bleeding events, and emergency department visits. Results At least one eligible period for extended INR testing was identified in 890 of 3362 (26.5%) warfarin-treated patients. Overall, the use of extended INR testing in eligible patients increased from 41.8% in the first quarter of 2014 to 69.3% in the fourth quarter of 2016. The number of subsequent out-of-range next INR values were similar between eligible patients who did and did not have an extended INR testing interval (27.3% versus 28.4%, respectively). The numbers of major bleeding events were not different between the two groups, but rates of clinically relevant non-major bleeding (0.02 per 100 patient-years versus 0.09 per 100 patient-years) and emergency department visits (0.07 per 100 patient-years versus 0.19 per 100 patient-years) were lower for eligible patients with extended INR testing intervals than for those with non-extended INR testing intervals. Conclusions Extended INR testing for stable warfarin patients can be successfully and safely implemented in diverse, practice-based anticoagulation clinic settings., (© 2018 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.)

Background: The impact on health-care costs and utilization of a single out-of-range (OOR) INR value not associated with bleeding or thromboembolic complication among chronic warfarin-treated patients is not well described., Methods: At four large phone-based anticoagulation clinics (total 14 948 patients), warfarin-treated patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) or venous thromboembolism were retrospectively propensity matched into an OOR INR group (n = 116) and a control group (n = 58). Types and frequency of contacts (eg, phone, voicemail, facsimile) and personnel involved were identified. A prospective time study analysis of 59 OOR and 92 control patients was performed over 8.5 days to record the time required to care for these patients. 2016 USD cost estimates were generated from average salaries., Results: OOR and in-range INR patients experienced an average of 4.2 and 3.2 ( P  <   .001) INR lab draws until two sequential tests were in range. OOR INR patients required an average of 5.3 interactions with the anticoagulation clinic vs 3.7 for in-range INR patients ( P  <   .001). OOR INR patients more often required phone calls, fewer mailed letters, and more often required multiple types of contact than in-range INR patients. In the prospective analysis, total median time involved for each OOR INR value was 5.1 minutes (IQR 3.7-9.5) vs 2.9 minutes (IQR 1.8-5.8) for control INR values ( P  <   .001). At the clinic level, OOR INR values were associated with a yearly staff cost of $17 938 (IQR $8969-$31 391)., Conclusions: We quantified the amount of extra anticoagulation staff effort required to manage warfarin-treated patients who experience a single OOR INR value without bleeding or thromboembolic complications, which leads to higher healthcare utilization costs.

To understand how physicians from various specialties perceive coordination of care when managing peri-procedural anticoagulation. Cross-sectional survey of cardiologists, gastroenterologists, and primary care physicians (PCPs) in an integrated health system (N = 251). The survey began with a vignette of a patient with atrial fibrillation co-managed by his PCP, cardiologist, and an anticoagulation clinic who must hold warfarin for a colonoscopy. Respondents' experiences and opinions around responsibilities and institutional support for managing peri-procedural anticoagulation were elicited using multiple choice questions. We examined differences in responses across specialties using Chi square analysis. The response rate was 51% (n = 127). 52% were PCPs, 28% cardiologists, and 21% gastroenterologists. Nearly half (47.2%) of respondents believed that the cardiologist should be primarily responsible for managing peri-procedural anticoagulation, while fewer identified the PCP (25.2%), anticoagulation clinic (21.3%), or gastroenterologist (6.3%; p = 0.09). Respondents across specialties had significantly different approaches to deciding how to manage the clinical case presented (p < 0.001). Most cardiologists (60.0%) would decide whether to offer bridging without consulting with other providers or clinical resources, while most PCPs would decide after consulting clinical resources (57.6%). Gastroenterologists would most often (46.2%) defer the decision to another provider. A majority of all three specialties agreed that their institution could do more to help manage peri-procedural anticoagulation, and there was broad support (88.1%) for anticoagulation clinics' managing all aspects of peri-procedural anticoagulation. Providers across specialties agree that their institution could do more to help manage peri-procedural anticoagulation, and overwhelmingly support anticoagulation clinics' taking responsibility.

Objectives: The purpose of this research is to analyze factors associated with delays to surgical management of Type A acute aortic dissection patients., Methods: Time from diagnosis to surgery and associated factors were evaluated in 1880 surgically managed Type A dissection patients enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection., Results: The majority of patients were transferred (75.7% vs 24.3%). Patients who were transferred had a median delay from diagnosis to surgery of 4.0 hours (interquartile range 2.5-7.2 hours), compared with 2.3 hours (interquartile range 1.1-4.2 hours; P < .001) in nontransferred patients. Among patients who were transferred, those with worst-ever, posterior, or tearing chest pain those with severe complications, and those receiving transthoracic echocardiogram prior to a transesophageal echocardiogram or as the only echocardiogram were treated more quickly. Those undergoing magnetic resonance imaging, or who had prior cardiac surgery, had longer delays to surgery. Among nontransferred patients, those with coma were treated more quickly. In both groups, patients presenting with emergent conditions such as cardiac tamponade, hypotension, or shock had more rapid treatment. Among transferred patients, surviving patients had longer delays (4.1 [2.6-7.8] hours vs 3.3 [2.0-6.0] hours, P = .001). Overall mortality did not differ between patients who were transferred vs not (19.3% vs 21.1%, P = .416)., Conclusion: Simply being transferred added significantly to the delay to surgery for Type A acute aortic dissection patients, but a number of factors affected its extent. Overall, signs and symptoms leading to a definitive diagnosis or indicating immediate life threat reduced time to surgery, while factors suggesting other diagnoses correlated with delays., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Clinical factors and patient preferences are important for selecting oral anticoagulants for venous thromboembolism (VTE) and atrial fibrillation (AF). The relative association of sociodemographic factors with anticoagulant use is unknown. We evaluated a prospective cohort to compare sociodemographic variables in patients who continued on warfarin for AF or VTE to those who transitioned to 1 of the direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Adult patients, newly started on warfarin, were enrolled through 6 anticoagulation clinics across Michigan. Of 8468 patients, 53.3% had AF, 45.6% had VTE, and 1.1% had both. Of these, 696 (8.2%) switched from warfarin to a DOAC. There were no significant differences between switchers and nonswitchers for percentage of time with a therapeutic international normalized ratio on warfarin, urban-rural residence status, or health insurance. Switchers were more often white (83.3% vs 77.7%; P < .001), partnered (67.3% vs 59.2%; P < .001), or resided in a zip code with a higher median household income ( P < .001). The results show that sociodemographic factors, such as race, partnered status, and income are associated with a patient's likelihood of switching to a DOAC vs remaining on warfarin therapy. Although clinical factors predominate, the reason for, and impact of, these observed variations in care requires further investigation., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest disclosure: E.K.-R. reports serving on the board of Anticoagulation Forum and consulting for Janssen and American College of Physicians. S.A. reports grant support from Boston Scientific Watchman and the Abbott Absorb Trial, consulting for Kona, Trice Orthopedics, and Micardia, and ownership in Biostar Ventures and Ablative Solutions. S.K. reports receiving speaker’s fees from Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, CSL Behring, and Daiichi Sankyo, and has been a consultant for Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Janssen, Daiichi Sankyo, Portola, and Roche. J.B.F. reports consulting for Merck, Janssen, and Novartis, grant support from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and the Fibromuscular Disease Society of America, and serving on the Advisory Committees of Boehringer Ingelheim and Pfizer. G.D.B. reports consulting for Aralez and grant support from Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan. The remaining authors declare no competing financial interests.

Importance: The prevalence of intracranial aneurysm in patients with fibromuscular dysplasia (FMD) is uncertain., Objective: To examine the prevalence of intracranial aneurysm in women diagnosed with FMD., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included 669 women with intracranial imaging registered in the US Registry for Fibromuscular Dysplasia, an observational disease-based registry of patients with FMD confirmed by vascular imaging and currently enrolling at 14 participating US academic centers. Registry enrollment began in 2008, and data were abstracted in September 2015. Patients younger than 18 years at the time of FMD diagnosis were excluded. Imaging reports of all patients with reported internal carotid, vertebral, or suspected intracranial artery aneurysms were reviewed. Only saccular or broad-based aneurysms 2 mm or larger in greatest dimension were included. Extradural aneurysms in the internal carotid artery were included; fusiform aneurysms, infundibulae, and vascular segments with uncertainty were excluded., Main Outcomes and Measures: Percentage of women with FMD with intracranial imaging who had an intracranial aneurysm., Results: Of 1112 female patients in the registry, 669 (60.2%) had undergone intracranial imaging at the time of enrollment (mean [SD] age at enrollment, 55.6 [10.9] years). Of the 669 patients included in the analysis, 86 (12.9%; 95% CI, 10.3%-15.9%) had at least 1 intracranial aneurysm. Of these 86 patients, 25 (53.8%) had more than 1 intracranial aneurysm. Intracranial aneurysms 5 mm or larger occurred in 32 of 74 patients (43.2%), and 24 of 128 intracranial aneurysms (18.8%) were in the posterior communicating or posterior arteries. The presence of intracranial aneurysm did not vary with location of extracranial FMD involvement. A history of smoking was significantly associated with intracranial aneurysm: 42 of 78 patients with intracranial aneurysm (53.8%) had a smoking history vs 163 of 564 patients without intracranial aneurysm (28.9%; P < .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: The prevalence of intracranial aneurysm in women diagnosed with FMD is significantly higher than reported in the general population. Although the clinical benefit of screening for intracranial aneurysm in patients with FMD has yet to be proven, these data lend support to the recommendation that all patients with FMD undergo intracranial imaging if not already performed.

Background: Patients on chronic warfarin therapy require regular laboratory monitoring to safely manage warfarin. Recent studies have challenged the need for routine monthly blood draws in the most stable warfarin-treated patients, suggesting the safety of less frequent laboratory testing (up to every 12 weeks). De-implementation efforts aim to reduce the use of low-value clinical practices. To explore barriers and facilitators of a de-implementation effort to reduce the use of frequent laboratory tests for patients with stable warfarin management in nurse/pharmacist-run anticoagulation clinics, we performed a mixed-methods study conducted within a state-wide collaborative quality improvement collaborative., Methods: Using a mixed-methods approach, we conducted post-implementation semi-structured interviews with a total of eight anticoagulation nurse or pharmacist staff members at five participating clinic sites to assess barriers and facilitators to de-implementing frequent international normalized ratio (INR) laboratory testing among patients with stable warfarin control. Interview guides were based on the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Disease (TICD) framework. Informed by interview themes, a survey was developed and administered to all anticoagulation clinical staff (n = 62) about their self-reported utilization of less frequent INR testing and specific barriers to de-implementing the standard (more frequent) INR testing practice., Results: From the interviews, four themes emerged congruent with TICD domains: (1) staff overestimating their actual use of less frequent INR testing (individual health professional factors), (2) barriers to appropriate patient engagement (incentives and resources), (3) broad support for an electronic medical record flag to identify potentially eligible patients (incentives and resources), and (4) the importance of personalized nurse/pharmacist feedback (individual health professional factors). In the survey (65% response rate), staff report offering less frequent INR testing to 56% (46-66%) of eligible patients. Most survey responders (n = 24; 60%) agreed that an eligibility flag in the electronic medical record would be very helpful. Twenty-four (60%) respondents agreed that periodic, personalized feedback on use of less frequent INR testing would also be helpful., Conclusions: Leveraging information system notifications, reducing additional work load burden for participating patients and providers, and providing personalized feedback are strategies that may improve adoption and utilization new policies in anticoagulation clinics that focus on de-implementation.

A high SAMe-TT 2 R 2 score predicted poor warfarin control and adverse events among atrial fibrillation patients. However, the SAMe-TT 2 R 2 score has not been well validated in venous thromboembolism (VTE) patients. A cohort of 1943 warfarin-treated patients with acute VTE was analyzed to correlate the SAMe-TT 2 R 2 score with time in therapeutic range (TTR) and clinical adverse events. A TTR <60% was more frequent among patients with a high (>2) versus low (0-1) SAMe-TT 2 R 2 score (63.4% vs 52.3%, p<0.0001). A high SAMe-TT 2 R 2 score (>2) correlated with increased overall adverse events (7.9 vs 4.5 overall adverse events/100 patient years, p=0.002), driven primarily by increased recurrent VTE rates (4.2 vs 1.5 recurrent VTE/100 patient years, p=0.0003). The SAMe-TT 2 R 2 score had a modest predictive ability for international normalized ratio (INR) quality and adverse clinical events among warfarin-treated VTE patients. The utility of the SAMe-TT 2 R 2 score to guide clinical decision-making remains to be investigated.

Direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) agents offer several lifestyle and therapeutic advantages for patients relative to warfarin in the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). These alternative agents are increasingly used in the treatment of AF, however the adoption practices, patient profiles, and reasons for switching to a DOAC from warfarin have not been well studied. Through the Michigan Anticoagulation Quality Improvement Initiative, abstracted data from 3873 AF patients, enrolled between 2010 and 2015, were collected on demographics and comorbid conditions, stroke and bleeding risk scores, and reasons for anticoagulant switching. Over the study period, patients who switched from warfarin to a DOAC had similar baseline characteristics, risk scores, and insurance status but differed in baseline CrCl. The most common reasons for switching were patient related ease of use concerns (37.5%) as opposed to clinical reasons (16.5% of patients). Only 13% of patients that switched to a DOAC switched back to warfarin by the end of the study period.

All available direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are at least partially eliminated by the kidneys. These agents are increasingly being used as alternatives to warfarin for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. The aim of this study was to identify changes in renal function and associated DOAC dosing implications in a multicenter cohort of atrial fibrillation patients switched from warfarin to DOAC treatment. We included all patients in the Michigan Anticoagulation Quality Improvement Initiative cohort who switched from warfarin to a DOAC with atrial fibrillation as their anticoagulant indication between 2009 and 2014, and who had at least two creatinine values. Compliance with FDA-recommended dosing based on renal function was assessed. Of the 189 patients switched from warfarin to a DOAC, 34 (18.0 %) had a baseline creatinine clearance <50 mL/min and 23 (12.2 %) experienced important fluctuations in renal function. Of these 23 patients, 6 (26.1 %) should have impacted the DOAC dosing, but only 1 patient actually received an appropriate dose adjustment. Additionally, 15 (7.9 %) of patients on DOACs had a dose change performed, but only one patient demonstrated a change in renal function to justify the dose adjustment. Most atrial fibrillation patients who switched from warfarin to a DOAC had stable renal function. However, the majority of patients who had a change in renal function did not receive the indicated dose change. As the use of DOACs expands, monitoring of renal function and appropriate dose adjustments are critical.

Stanford type B aortic dissection (TBAD) is a life-threatening aortic disease. The initial management goal is to prevent aortic rupture, propagation of the dissection, and symptoms by reducing the heart rate and blood pressure. Uncomplicated TBAD patients require prompt medical management to prevent aortic dilatation or rupture during subsequent follow-up. Complicated TBAD patients require immediate invasive management to prevent death or injury caused by rupture or malperfusion. Recent developments in diagnosis and management have reduced mortality related to TBAD considerably. In particular, the introduction of thoracic stent-grafts has shifted the management from surgical to endovascular repair, contributing to a fourfold increase in early survival in complicated TBAD. Furthermore, endovascular repair is now considered in some uncomplicated TBAD patients in addition to optimal medical therapy. For more challenging aortic dissection patients with involvement of the aortic arch, hybrid approaches, combining open and endovascular repair, have had promising results. Regardless of the chosen management strategy, strict antihypertensive control should be administered to all TBAD patients in addition to close imaging surveillance. Future developments in stent-graft design, medical therapy, surgical and hybrid techniques, imaging, and genetic screening may improve the outcomes of TBAD patients even further. We present a comprehensive review of the recommended management strategy based on current evidence in the literature., (© The Author(s) 2016.)

Anticoagulation clinics were initially developed to provide safe and effective care for warfarin-treated patients with atrial fibrillation, venous thromboembolism, and mechanical valve replacement. Traditionally, these patients required ongoing laboratory monitoring and warfarin dose adjustment by expert providers. With the introduction of direct oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban), many have questioned the need for anticoagulation clinic. However, we think that the growing number of oral anticoagulant choices creates an urgent need for expanding the traditional role of the anticoagulation clinic. We outline 3 key purposes that a reimagined anticoagulation clinic would serve: (1) to assist patients and clinicians with selecting the most appropriate drug and dose from a growing list of anticoagulant options (including warfarin), (2) to help patients minimize the risk of serious bleeding complications with careful long-term monitoring and peri-procedural management, and (3) to encourage ongoing adherence to these life-saving medications. We also describe how repurposing anticoagulation clinics as broader medication safety clinics would promote safe and effective care across a range of cardiovascular conditions for high-risk medications (eg, spironolactone, amiodarone). Finally, we highlight a few existing health systems that are overcoming key challenges to implementing a reimagined anticoagulation or medication safety clinic structure., (© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Dabigatran has been shown to be superior to warfarin for stroke prevention in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) but with higher out-of-pocket costs for patients. Although dabigatran has been shown to be cost effective from a societal perspective, cost implications for individual patients and insurers are not well described. We aimed to assess cost perspectives of each payer (Medicare and patient) in relation to administration, monitoring, and adverse outcomes for dabigatran and warfarin in patients with and without prescription drug coverage. Using a Markov model, we performed a decision analysis comparing 2 treatment strategies (dose-adjusted warfarin and dabigatran 150 mg twice daily) in patients 65 years old with NVAF, CHADS2 scores ≥ 1, and Medicare insurance. Patients have a quality-adjusted life expectancy of 8.998 quality-adjusted life years with warfarin and 9.39 quality-adjusted life years with dabigatran 150 mg twice daily. From Medicare's perspective, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio comparing dabigatran with warfarin was $35,311 for patients with Part D coverage and cost saving for patients without coverage. From the patient's perspective, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio comparing dabigatran with warfarin was cost saving for patients with Part D coverage and $63,884 for those without coverage. In patients ≥ 65 years with NVAF and prescription insurance coverage, dabigatran 150 mg twice daily is both cost effective (Medicare's perspective) and cost saving (patient perspective) compared with warfarin, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000. However, patients without prescription drug coverage have a high out-of-pocket cost burden with dabigatran therapy, leading to a reduction in its cost-effectiveness compared with warfarin therapy. In conclusion, this Markov model suggests that Medicare Part D coverage influences the cost-effectiveness of dabigatran 150 mg daily compared with dose-adjusted warfarin from multiple payer perspectives., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

It has been suggested that direct oral anticoagulants are being preferentially used in low risk atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Understanding the changing risk profile of new AF patients treated with warfarin is important for interpreting the quality of warfarin delivery through an anticoagulation clinic. Six anticoagulation clinics participating in the Michigan Anticoagulation Quality Improvement Initiative enrolled 1293 AF patients between 2010 and 2014 as an inception cohort. Abstracted data included demographics, comorbidities, medication use and all INR values. Risk scores including CHADS2, CHA2DS2-VASc, HAS-BLED, SAMe-TT2R2, and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) were calculated for each patient at the time of warfarin initiation. The quality of anticoagulation was assessed using the Rosendaal time in the therapeutic range (TTR) during the first 6 months of treatment. Between 2010 and 2014, patients initiating warfarin therapy for AF had an increasing mean CHADS2 (2.0 ± 1.1 to 2.2 ± 1.4, p = 0.02) and CCI (4.7 ± 1.8 to 5.1 ± 2.0, p = 0.03), and a trend towards increasing mean CHA2DS2-VASc, HAS-BLED, and SAMe-TT2R2 scores. The actual TTR remained unchanged over the study period (62.6 ± 18.2 to 62.7 ± 17.0, p = 0.98), and the number of INR checks did not change (18.9 ± 5.2 to 18.5 ± 5.1, p = 0.06). Between 2010 and 2014, AF patients newly starting warfarin had mild increases in risk for stroke and death with sustained quality of warfarin therapy.

The field of perioperative medicine has garnered legitimacy during the past 3 decades. Adverse cardiovascular events in the perioperative period account for significant morbidity and mortality. Although testing patients preoperatively to detect ischemia and identify those who may benefit from modifications in care is a tempting strategy, risk assessment should account for posterior probability. Validated risk stratification tools, such as the Revised Cardiac Risk Index or the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program risk calculator, can assist in the identification of patients for whom preoperative noninvasive testing is justified and may change the plan of care. Furthermore, current guidelines emphasize that prophylactic coronary revascularization should not be performed exclusively for the purposes of reducing the risk of perioperative events. There has been enthusiasm for medical therapies that may reduce the risk of adverse cardiovascular events in the perioperative period. Current guidelines encourage the perioperative use of β-blockade in patients already receiving such therapy and caution against initiating such therapy on the day of the surgical procedure. Reduction of morbidity and mortality in the perioperative period relies on an understanding of the myriad physiological perturbations in this period and thoughtful selection of patients for further testing and treatment.

Initial treatment for venous thromboembolism (VTE) includes the acute and intermediate phases, usually lasting for 3 months. The choice to extend therapy beyond the initial 3-month window involves assessing a combination of risk factors for VTE recurrence and bleeding, along with weighing patient preferences. In some cases, such as VTE provoked by a reversible surgical risk factor, the recurrence risk is sufficiently low that most patients should not receive extended therapy. In other cases, such as VTE associated with malignancy, the recurrence risk is sufficiently high that treatment should be extended beyond the initial 3 months. However, a large number of patients fall into a grey zone where the decision on extended therapy is less clear-cut. In this review, we summarize the evidence for VTE recurrence risk and the role for extended anticoagulation given a variety of patient-specific factors and laboratory results. We also review the role of VTE risk prediction tools and provide a recommended algorithm for approaching the decision of extended anticoagulation therapy. Various agents available for extended VTE therapy, including warfarin, aspirin and the direct oral anticoagulant agents, are discussed., (© The Author(s) 2015.)

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is commonly managed by a variety of specialists. Current guidelines differ in their recommendations leading to uncertainty regarding important clinical decisions. We sought to document practice pattern variation among cardiologists, emergency physicians (EP) and hospitalists at a single academic, tertiary-care center., Methods: A survey was created containing seven clinical scenarios of patients presenting with AF. We analyzed respondent choices regarding rate vs rhythm control, thromboembolic treatment and hospitalization strategies. Finally, we contrasted our findings with a comparable Australasian survey to provide an international reference., Results: There was a 78% response rate (124 of 158), 37% hospitalists, 31.5% cardiologists, and 31.5% EP. Most respondents chose rate over rhythm control (92.2%; 95% CI, 89.1% - 94.5%) and thromboembolic treatment (67.8%; 95% CI, 63.8% - 71.7%). Compared to both hospitalists and EPs, cardiologists were more likely to choose thromboembolic treatment for new and paroxysmal AF (adjusted OR 2.38; 95% CI, 1.05 - 5.41). They were less likely to favor hospital admission across all types of AF (adjusted OR 0.36; 95% CI, 0.17 - 0.79) but thought cardiology consultation was more important (adjusted OR 1.88, 95% CI, 0.97 - 3.64). Australasian physicians were more aggressive with rhythm control for paroxysmal AF with low CHADS2 score compared to US physicians., Conclusions: Significant variation exists among specialties in the management of acute AF, likely reflecting a lack of high quality research to direct the provider. Future studies may help to standardize practice leading to decreased rates of hospitalization and overall cost.

The Society for Vascular Medicine was founded in 1989. During the subsequent 25 years, the Society has grown to approximately 500 members and has achieved international recognition while making important contributions to vascular disease education, clinical vascular medicine and biology research, and patient care. In celebration of the Society's 25th anniversary, its past and current presidents reflect on the Society's history, challenges, and achievements, and emphasize the vital role of the SVM in the discipline of vascular medicine., (© The Author(s) 2015.)

Although warfarin has historically been the dominant oral anticoagulant, newer target-specific oral anticoagulants (TSOACs) have been introduced in the marketplace in the past few years. Dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban, collectively referred to as TSOACs, have undergone extensive testing in comparison with warfarin and other anticoagulants for a variety of conditions. Compared with warfarin, the shorter time to peak effect, shorter half-life, and fewer drug-drug interactions have helped make the TSOACs attractive alternatives to warfarin for the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic disease associated with orthopedic surgery and atrial fibrillation as well as for the treatment of venous thromboembolism. However, their unique properties pose a challenge for their management in the perioperative period. This article reviews the current guideline-based approach to perioperative management of anticoagulants, the clinical data, and the recommendations supporting use of the TSOACs in the perioperative period. The article also addresses common pitfalls in their perioperative management. By understanding a few key properties of the new oral anticoagulants and with careful perioperative planning, physicians can ensure that their patients will safely undergo most surgical procedures with minimal disruption of their chronic anticoagulation.

Introduction: Guidelines recommend the assessment of stroke and bleeding risk before initiating warfarin anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation. Many of the elements used to predict stroke also overlap with bleeding risk in atrial fibrillation patients and it is tempting to use stroke risk scores to efficiently estimate bleeding risk. Comparison of stroke risk scores to bleeding risk scores to predict bleeding has not been thoroughly assessed., Methods: 2600 patients followed at seven anticoagulation clinics were followed from October 2009-May 2013. Five risk models (CHADS2, CHA2DS2-VASc, HEMORR2HAGES, HAS-BLED and ATRIA) were retrospectively applied to each patient. The primary outcome was the first major bleeding event. Area under the ROC curves were compared with C statistic and net reclassification improvement (NRI) analysis was performed., Results: 110 patients experienced a major bleeding event in 2581.6 patient-years (4.5%/year). Mean follow up was 1.0±0.8years. All of the formal bleeding risk scores had a modest predictive value for first major bleeding events (C statistic 0.66-0.69), performing better than CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores (C statistic difference 0.10 - 0.16). NRI analysis demonstrated a 52-69% and 47-64% improvement of the formal bleeding risk scores over the CHADS2 score and CHA2DS2-VASc score, respectively., Conclusions: The CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores did not perform as well as formal bleeding risk scores for prediction of major bleeding in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients treated with warfarin. All three bleeding risk scores (HAS-BLED, ATRIA and HEMORR2HAGES) performed moderately well., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Despite its status as a world leader in treatment innovation and medical education, a quality chasm exists in American health care. Care fragmentation and poor coordination contribute to expensive care with highly variable quality in the United States. The rising costs of health care since 1990 have had a huge impact on individuals, families, businesses, the federal and state governments, and the national budget deficit. The passage of the Affordable Care Act represents a large shift in how health care is financed and delivered in the United States. The objective of this review is to describe some of the economic and social forces driving health care reform, provide an overview of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), and review model cardiovascular quality improvement programs underway in the state of Michigan. As health care reorganization occurs at the federal level, local and regional efforts can serve as models to accelerate improvement toward achieving better population health and better care at lower cost. Model programs in Michigan have achieved this goal in cardiovascular care through the systematic application of evidence-based care, the utilization of regional quality improvement collaboratives, community-based childhood wellness promotion, and medical device-based competitive bidding strategies. These efforts are examples of the direction cardiovascular care delivery will need to move in this era of the Affordable Care Act.

Medical management is generally the preferred treatment for uncomplicated type B acute aortic dissection cases. It is often centered on the use of antihypertensive agents, which alleviates hemodynamic stress on the damaged aortic wall. Methods of medical management and drug selection are still based mainly on personal experience, expert opinion and historical observational studies as randomized controlled studies are lacking. Guidelines from European (ESC), American (ACC/AHA) and Asian (Japan) societies in the last decade have made recommendations on use of medications, but also reaffirmed the lack of evidence for therapeutic approaches and targeted medical management. More recent evidence suggests that there may be type-selective benefits for antihypertensive medications. Here, we will discuss the present understanding of medical management of acute aortic dissection.

Objectives: To compare the characteristics, treatments, and outcomes for emergency department (ED) patients with severe hypertension by disposition (admitted versus discharged home)., Methods: Studying the Treatment of Acute hyperTension (STAT) is a multicenter registry of 1566 patients with blood pressure ≥180/110 mm Hg who were treated with intravenous antihypertensive medications in an ED or intensive care unit. Presenting and in-hospital variables, and postdischarge outcomes for the 1053 patients in the ED subset were compared by disposition., Results: In the multivariable analysis, ED patients were less likely to be discharged if >75 years of age (odds ratio [OR] = 0.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.1-0.9) or if they had shortness of breath (OR = 0.4, 95% CI = 0.2-0.8) or alteration of mental status (OR = 0.1, 95% CI = 0.02-0.9) on arrival. Nondialysis patients with an admission creatinine concentration >1.5 mg/dL were 80% less likely to be discharged than those ≤1.5 mg/dL (OR = 0.2, 95% CI = 0.08-0.5). In the bivariate analysis, patients with a decrease in systolic blood pressure of <10% 2 hours after medication administration were more likely to be admitted than those discharged (57% vs. 44%; P = 0.041). Disposition did not correlate with 90-day or 6-month mortality or 30-day readmission. However, admitted patients had a higher 90-day readmission rate (38% vs. 24%; P = 0.038)., Conclusions: ED patients with severe hypertension were more likely to be admitted to the hospital if they were >75 years of age, presented with shortness of breath or altered mental status, or had a creatinine >1.5 mg/dL and were not on hemodialysis.

Importance. The anticoagulant warfarin has been shown to interact with other medications, vitamin K containing foods, and over-the-counter products. These interactions may inhibit or potentiate the effect of warfarin, resulting in serious clotting or bleeding events. Observations. We report the case of an 84-year-old woman with atrial fibrillation, prescribed warfarin in May 2010 for stroke prevention. Her international normalized ratio (INR) was stable until April 2013, when she was prescribed AREDS (Age Related Eye Disease Study) formula pills, an eye vitamin compound, to slow the progression of age-related macular degeneration. This change was not reported to the Anticoagulation Service. Eighteen days later, she presented to the ED with groin and back pain and an INR of 10.4. An abdominal CT revealed a retroperitoneal hemorrhage with extension in multiple muscles. Both warfarin and AREDS were discontinued and the patient was discharged to subacute rehabilitation. This case was reviewed by the Anticoagulation Service and actions were taken to prevent similar adverse events. Conclusions. This report provides an example of the potential danger of supplement use, in this case, AREDS formula, in patients prescribed warfarin, and the importance of communicating medication changes to the providers responsible for warfarin management.

To more accurately quantify the proportion of anticoagulated patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) that may be inappropriately treated with warfarin for stroke prevention. Patients with AF have an increased risk of stroke, which is lowered by the use of warfarin. However there is likely more potential harm than benefit in patients that do not have additional stroke risk factors. Studies have described overuse of warfarin for stroke prophylaxis in lowest risk patients. However, many of those studies did not assess for electrical cardioversion (ECV) or radiofrequency ablation (RFA) as indications for warfarin therapy. Data from 1852 non-valvular AF patients treated with warfarin between October 2009 and October 2011 at seven anticoagulation centers participating in the Michigan Anticoagulation Quality Improvement Initiative registry were analyzed. Low risk AF patients were risk stratified using the CHADS2 scoring systems, with a score of zero representing lowest risk. 193 (10.4 %) of AF patients receiving warfarin were identified as having the lowest risk of stroke by the CHADS2 score. Of the patients with CHADS2 = 0, 130 (67.4 %) had undergone a recent ECV and/or RFA. Of all AF patients, only 63 (3.4 %) had a CHADS2 score of 0 and no recent ECV or RFA. The vast majority of AF patients receiving anticoagulation in this multi-center registry are doing so in accordance with national and international guidelines. In contrast to prior population-based studies, very few low risk patients are receiving inappropriate warfarin therapy for stroke prophylaxis in AF, when procedure-based indications are also considered.

Background: Complicated acute type B aortic dissection (cABAD) generally requires urgent intervention. Advanced age is a risk factor for mortality after thoracic aortic intervention, including surgery for aortic dissection. The purpose of this study was to investigate the exact impact of increasing age on the management and outcomes of cABAD., Methods: We analyzed the outcomes of 583 patients with cABAD enrolled in the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD) between 1996 and 2012. All patients with cABAD were categorized according to age by decade and management type (medical, surgical, or endovascular treatment), and outcomes were subsequently investigated in the different age groups., Results: The mean age of the cohort was 63.4 ± 14.2 years, 36% of patients (n = 209) were greater than 70 years of age and 64% (n = 374) were less than 70 years. The utilization of surgery and endovascular techniques progressively decreased with patient age, while the rate of medical management significantly increased with age (p < 0.001). The in-hospital mortality rates for complicated patients younger than 70 years versus 70 years or more were 10.1% versus 30.0% for endovascular treatment (p = 0.001), 17.2% versus 34.2% for surgical treatment (p = 0.027), and 14.2% versus 32.2% for medical treatment (p = 0.001). Age 70 years or greater was a predictor of in-hospital mortality in multivariate analysis (odds ratio 2.37, 95% confidence interval: 1.23 to 4.54, p = 0.010)., Conclusions: Advanced age has a dramatic impact on the management and outcomes of patients with cABAD. A nonsignificant trend toward lower mortality after endovascular management was observed, both for younger patients and for elderly patients., (Copyright © 2013 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The classification of aortic dissection into acute (<14 days from symptom onset) versus chronic (≥14 days) is based on survival estimates of patients treated decades before modern diagnostic and treatment modalities were available. A new classification of aortic dissection in the current era may provide clinicians with a more precise method of characterizing the interaction of time, dissection location, and treatment type with survival., Methods: We developed separate Kaplan-Meier survival curves for Type A and Type B aortic dissection using data from the International Registry of Aortic Dissection (IRAD). Daily survival was stratified based on type of therapy provided: medical therapy alone (medical), nonsurgical intervention plus medical therapy (endovascular), and open surgery plus medical therapy (surgical). The log-rank statistic was used to compare the survival curves of each management type within Type A and Type B aortic dissection., Results: There were 1815 patients included, 67.3% male with mean age 62.0 ± 14.2 years. When survival curves were constructed, 4 distinct time periods were noted: hyperacute (symptom onset to 24 hours), acute (2-7 days), subacute (8-30 days), and chronic (>30 days). Overall survival was progressively lower through the 4 time periods., Conclusions: This IRAD classification system can provide clinicians with a more robust method of characterizing survival after aortic dissection over time than previous methods. This system will be useful for treating patients, counseling patients and families, and studying new diagnostic and treatment methods., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Dabigatran was expected to replace warfarin for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) who are warfarin naive, difficult to maintain in therapeutic range, or at risk of warfarin-related bleeding complications. We hypothesized that the number of patients with nonvalvular AF referred to Anticoagulation Management Services would decrease sharply and that most would switch from warfarin to dabigatran. We evaluated the number of patients with nonvalvular AF referred to 2 large services, Anticoagulation Management Service 1 and Anticoagulation Management Service 2, 12 months before and after market entry of dabigatran. We also evaluated the number of patients who switched from warfarin to dabigatran. Anticoagulation Management Service 1 follows 1,225 patients with nonvalvular AF with mean CHADS₂ and CHA₂DS₂-VASc scores of 2.0 and 3.5, respectively. Anticoagulation Management Service 2 follows 1,137 patients with nonvalvular AF with mean CHADS₂ and CHA₂DS₂-VASc scores of 2.0 and 3.3, respectively. In the 12 months preceding market entry of dabigatran, patients with nonvalvular AF constituted 537 (31.4%) of the referrals sent to Anticoagulation Management Service 1 and increased to 793 (32.3%) in the following 12 months. For Anticoagulation Management Service 2, patients with nonvalvular AF constituted 617 (30.7%) of referrals before market entry of dabigatran and decreased to 495 (25.2%) of referrals. Eighty-one patients (6.6%) from Anticoagulation Management Service 1 and 44 (3.9%) from Anticoagulation Management Service 2 have switched from warfarin to dabigatran. The frequency of initial prescription of dabigatran for stroke prevention in AF and the frequency of transition from warfarin to dabigatran have been less than expected., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Partial thrombosis of the false lumen has been related to aortic growth, reoperations, and death in the chronic phase of type B and repaired type A aortic dissections. The impact of preoperative false lumen thrombosis has not been studied previously. We used data from a contemporary, multinational database on aortic dissections to evaluate whether different degrees of preoperative false lumen thrombosis influenced long-term prognosis., Methods and Results: We examined the records of 522 patients with surgically treated acute type A aortic dissections who survived to discharge between 1996 and 2011. At the preoperative imaging, 414 (79.3%) patients had patent false lumens, 84 (16.1%) had partial thrombosis of the false lumen, and 24 (4.6%) had complete thrombosis of the false lumen. The annual median (interquartile range) aortic growth rates were 0.5 (-0.3 to 2.0) mm in the aortic arch, 2.0 (0.2 to 4.0) mm in the descending thoracic aorta, and similar regardless of the degree of false lumen thrombosis. The overall 5-year survival rate was 84.7%, and it was not influenced by false lumen thrombosis (P=0.86 by the log-rank test). Independent predictors of long-term mortality were age >70 years (hazard ratio [HR], 2.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20 to 4.56, P=0.012) and postoperative cerebrovascular accident, coma, and/or renal failure (HR, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.40 to 4.92, P=0.003)., Conclusions: Patients with acute type A aortic dissection who survive to discharge have a favorable prognosis. Preoperative false lumen thrombosis does not influence long-term mortality, reintervention rates, or aortic growth.

Objective: Obesity has been associated with superior outcomes in heart failure (HF) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Although patients with new-onset HF after ACS are at a high risk, they may receive less aggressive treatment. It is unknown whether treatment practices are biased by BMI., Methods and Results: Consecutive patients without previous HF, who were hospitalized with ACS, and had left ventricular ejection fraction less than 40% or clinical HF were analyzed to assess the utilization of evidence-based treatment by BMI. BMI was categorized into normal (18.5 to <25 kg/m), overweight (25 to <30 kg/m), and obese (≥30 kg/m) groups. Multivariable logistic regression models were performed to examine the association of BMI with undergoing cardiac catheterization, and discharge on β-blocker or angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB). Analysis included 461 patients. There were no significant differences among BMI groups in performance of cardiac catheterization or discharge on ACE inhibitor/ARB or β-blocker. Compared with normal, neither overweight nor obese BMI was significantly associated with cardiac catheterization [overweight: odds ratio (OR) 1.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82-2.72, P=0.2; obese: OR 1.75, 95% CI 0.92-3.33, P=0.09], or discharge on ACE inhibitor/ARB (overweight: OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.40-1.21, P=0.7; obese: OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.39-1.23, P=0.2), or β-blocker (overweight: OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.69-2.21, P=0.5; obese: OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.62-2.07, P=0.7)., Conclusion: Among patients with new-onset HF complicating ACS, there were no significant differences in evidence-based treatment practices by BMI.

Background: Beta-blockers (BB) and statins (S) independently have been shown to reduce perioperative mortality and myocardial infarction (MI) in patients undergoing vascular surgery. In this study we evaluated the benefits of adding aspirin (A) to BB and S (ABBS), with/without angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I) on postoperative outcome in high-risk patients undergoing major vascular surgery., Methods: Analysis of consecutive patients undergoing elective vascular surgery at the University of Michigan Cardiovascular Center was performed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were done using cardiac risk index [Revised Cardiac Risk Index (RCRI), coronary artery disease (CAD), insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM), cerebral vascular disease, renal dysfunction, congestive heart failure, and major surgery]; pulmonary disease; and A, BB, S (ABBS)±ACE-I use. Baseline clinical characteristics and medication were adjusted using propensity scores. Endpoints were bleeding, 30-day MI, stroke, and 12-month mortality., Results: Between 2003 and 2010, 4,149 arterial procedures were performed, 819 of which were risk stratified as RCRI≥3. The incidence of MI was 3-fold lower (2.5% vs. 7.8%, OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.15-0.61, P=0.001) in ABBS±ACE-I (n=513) as compared with non-ABBS±ACE-I (n=306). The 12-month mortality was 8-fold lower in ABBS±ACE-I as compared non-ABBS±ACE-I (5.9% vs. 37.5%, HR 0.13, 95% CI 0.08-0.20, P<0.0001). After adjustment for the propensity to use various therapies, A (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.24-0.53, P<0.0001), BB (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.43-1.0, P=0.05), and S (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.25-0.53, P<0.0001) remained associated with improved 12-month survival. ACE-I use (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.54-1.19, P=0.27) was not predictive. Aspirin did not predict severe/moderate bleeding., Conclusions: In high-risk patients undergoing major vascular surgery, ABBS therapy has superior 30-day and 12-month risk reduction benefits for MI, stroke, and mortality as compared with A, BB, or S independently. ACE-I did not demonstrate additional risk-reduction benefits., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)