Search

BACKGROUND: Conflicting evidence exists on sex-based outcomes after coronary stenting. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data on 426 996 patients >=65 years old (42.3% women) from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry (2004-2008) were linked to Medicare inpatient claims to compare in-hospital outcomes by sex and long-term outcomes by sex and stent type. In-hospital complications were more frequent in women than in men: death (3869 [2.2%] versus 3737 [1.6%]; adjusted odds ratio, 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.33-1.49), myocardial infarction (2365 [1.3%] versus 2858 [1.2%]; odds ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.11-1.27), bleeding (7860 [4.4%] versus 5627 [2.3%]; odds ratio, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.79-1.93), and vascular complications (2381 [1.3%] versus 1648 [0.7%]; odds ratio, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.73-1.99). At 20.4 months, women had a lower adjusted risk of death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.92; 95% CI, 0.90-0.94) but similar rates of myocardial infarction, revascularization, and bleeding. Relative to bare metal stent use, drug-eluting stent use was associated with similar improved long-term outcomes in both sexes: death (women: adjusted HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.76-0.81; men: HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.74-0.79), myocardial infarction (women: HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.74-0.84; men: HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.77-0.85), and revascularization (women: HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.90-0.97; men: HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.88-0.94). There was no interaction between sex and stent type for long-term outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In contemporary coronary stenting, women have a slightly higher procedural risk than men but have better long-term survival. In both sexes, use of a drug-eluting stent is associated with lower long-term likelihood for death, myocardial infarction, and revascularization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The impact of polyvascular disease (peripheral arterial disease [PAD] and cerebrovascular disease [CVD]) on long-term cardiovascular outcomes among older patients with acute myocardial infarction has not been well studied.Methods and Results: Patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction aged ≥65 years from the CRUSADE (Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress Adverse Outcomes with Early Implementation of the ACC/AHA Guidelines) registry who survived to hospital discharge were linked to longitudinal data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (n=34 205). All patients were presumed to have coronary artery disease (CAD) and were classified into the following 4 groups: 10.7% with prior CVD (CAD+CVD group); 11.5% with prior PAD (CAD+PAD); 3.1% with prior PAD and CVD (CAD+PAD+CVD); and 74.7% with no polyvascular disease (CAD alone). Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to examine the hazard of long-term mortality and composite of death or readmission for myocardial infarction or stroke (median follow-up, 35 months; interquartile range, 17-49 months). Compared with the CAD alone group, patients with polyvascular disease had greater comorbidities, were less likely to undergo revascularization, and received less often recommended discharge interventions. Three-year mortality rates increased with number of arterial bed involvement as follows: 33% for CAD alone, 49% for CAD+PAD, 52% for CAD+CVD, and 59% for CAD+PAD+CVD. Relative to the CAD alone group, patients with all 3 arterial beds involved had the highest risk of long-term mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [95% CI], 1.49 [1.38-1.61]; CAD+CVD, 1.38 [1.31-1.44]; CAD+PAD, 1.29 [1.23-1.35]). Similarly, the risk of long-term composite ischemic events was highest among patients in the CAD+PAD+CVD group.Conclusions: Among older patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, those with polyvascular disease have substantially higher long-term risk for recurrent events or death. Future studies targeting greater adherence to secondary prevention strategies and novel therapies are needed to help to reduce long-term cardiovascular events in this vulnerable population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Studies have found that patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) often do not receive evidence-based therapies in community practice. This is particularly true in low- and middle-income countries.Objective: To evaluate whether a multifaceted quality improvement (QI) intervention can improve the use of evidence-based therapies and reduce the incidence of major cardiovascular events among patients with ACS in a middle-income country.Design, Setting, and Participants: The BRIDGE-ACS (Brazilian Intervention to Increase Evidence Usage in Acute Coronary Syndromes) trial, a cluster-randomized (concealed allocation) trial conducted among 34 clusters (public hospitals) in Brazil and enrolling a total of 1150 patients with ACS from March 15, 2011, through November 2, 2011, with follow-up through January 27, 2012.Intervention: Multifaceted QI intervention including educational materials for clinicians, reminders, algorithms, and case manager training, vs routine practice (control).Main Outcome Measures: Primary end point was the percentage of eligible patients who received all evidence-based therapies (aspirin, clopidogrel, anticoagulants, and statins) during the first 24 hours in patients without contraindications.Results: Mean age of the patients enrolled was 62 (SD, 13) years; 68.6% were men, and 40% presented with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, 35.6% with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and 23.6% with unstable angina. The randomized clusters included 79.5% teaching hospitals, all from major urban areas and 41.2% with 24-hour percutaneous coronary intervention capabilities. Among eligible patients (923/1150 [80.3%]), 67.9% in the intervention vs 49.5% in the control group received all eligible acute therapies (population average odds ratio [OR(PA)], 2.64 [95% CI, 1.28-5.45]). Similarly, among eligible patients (801/1150 [69.7%]), those in the intervention group were more likely to receive all eligible acute and discharge medications (50.9% vs 31.9%; OR(PA),, 2.49 [95% CI, 1.08-5.74]). Overall composite adherence scores were higher in the intervention clusters (89% vs 81.4%; mean difference, 8.6% [95% CI, 2.2%-15.0%]). In-hospital cardiovascular event rates were 5.5% in the intervention group vs 7.0% in the control group (OR(PA), 0.72 [95% CI, 0.36-1.43]); 30-day all-cause mortality was 7.0% vs 8.4% (ORPA, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.46-1.34]).Conclusion: Among patients with ACS treated in Brazil, a multifaceted educational intervention resulted in significant improvement in the use of evidence-based therapies.Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00958958. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients on home warfarin pose treatment concerns because of their potential increased risk of bleeding. Expert opinion from the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines suggest holding anticoagulants and initiating antiplatelet therapy among therapeutically anticoagulated non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients. Yet, little is known about contemporary treatment patterns and bleeding risks in this population. METHODS AND RESULTS: We stratified 5787 non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients on home warfarin therapy using data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With the Guidelines by admission international normalized ratio (INR) levels: subtherapeutic (INR <2), therapeutic (INR, 2-3), and supratherapeutic (INR >3). Multivariable logistic generalized estimating equations models were constructed to examine the associations between admission INR level, early antithrombotic treatment and invasive therapy, and risk of in-hospital major bleeding. Among these patients, 46%, 35%, and 19% had subtherapeutic, therapeutic, and supratherapeutic admission INR levels, respectively. Risk of major bleeding was higher among patients with therapeutic (15%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.50) and supratherapeutic (22%; odds ratio, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.30-1.97) anticoagulation compared with the subtherapeutic group (12%). Among patients with admission INR >=2, 45% were treated with early (within 24 hours) heparin, 35% with early clopidogrel, 14% with early glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor, and 36% with early invasive strategy. Early antithrombotic treatment was associated with increased bleeding risk (odds ratio, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.14-1.72] for heparin; 1.50 [95% CI, 1.22-1.84] for clopidogrel; and 1.82 [95% CI, 1.43-2.32] for glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor); however, an early invasive strategy was not (odds ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.86-1.37). No significant interactions were observed between INR level and use of each early treatment in its association with bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: National patterns of early antithrombotic treatment for non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients on home warfarin diverge from expert opinion provided by current practice guidelines. Early antithrombotic treatment was associated with increased bleeding risk regardless of admission INR level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: This study was undertaken to identify predictors of hospital length of stay (LOS) for heart failure (HF) patients using clinical variables available at the time of admission and hospital characteristics. METHODS AND RESULTS: A cohort of 70,094 HF patients discharged to home from 246 hospitals participating in the Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure was analyzed for admission predictors for LOS. The analysis incorporated patient characteristics (PC) first, then added hospital characteristics (HC) followed by standard laboratory evaluations (SL), including troponin and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP). There were 31,995 patients (45.6%) with LOS < 4 days, 26,750 (38.2%) with LOS 4 to 7 days, and 11,349 (16.2%) with LOS > 7 days. Patients with longer LOS had more comorbidities and a higher severity of disease on admission. Overall models explained a modest amount of LOS variation, with an r(2) of 4.8%, with PC responsible for 1.3% of variation and together with SL explained 2.2% of variation. HC did not change the variation. CONCLUSIONS: Based on admission vital signs and BNP levels, patients with longer LOS have more comorbidities and a higher disease severity. The ability to risk stratify for LOS based on patient admission and hospital characteristics is limited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]