Search

Preventing morbidity and mortality from diabetes mellitus is of paramount importance as the incidence of this disease is increasing across the world. While microvascular complications of diabetes such as nephropathy, retinopathy, and neuropathy are reduced with intensive glycemic control, treatment of hyperglycemia has not been consistently shown to have effects on the macrovascular complications of diabetes such as coronary artery, cerebrovascular, and peripheral vascular disease. Preventive efforts have accordingly shifted toward the modification of other cardiovascular risk factors in diabetic patients. Agonism of the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) has long been an attractive target for antidiabetic therapy due to the role of PPARs in glycemic control and lipid metabolism. PPAR-γ agonists such as rosiglitazone and pioglitazone are used in clinical practice for the treatment of diabetes, and there is some evidence that pioglitazone may have positive effects on cardiovascular complications by virtue of its favorable effects on lipid profiles. However, they have not been shown to reduce macrovascular events. PPAR-γ agonism is the mechanism of action in the fibrate class of medications; these agents have been shown to increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels, reduce triglyceride levels, and improve cardiovascular outcomes. Given the prevalence of lipid abnormalities in patients with diabetes, dual PPAR-α/γ agonists (glitazars) could potentially benefit patients with diabetes. A phase II trial examining a novel dual PPAR agonist, aleglitazar, showed that therapy with this agent reduced hyperglycemia and favorably modified levels of HDL-C and triglycerides with an acceptable safety profile. Aleglitazar is currently being studied in large-scale clinical trials to assess whether it will reduce the risk of major cardiovascular endpoints (death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) among patients with diabetes and coronary artery disease. If ongoing studies confirm the theoretical benefit and safety of dual PPAR-α/γ agonism, aleglitazar may become the first therapy demonstrated to reduce macrovascular complications in patients with diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients with previously implanted coronary stents are at risk for stent thrombosis if dual-antiplatelet therapy is prematurely discontinued. Bridging with a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor has been advocated as an alternative, with few supporting data. The aim of this study was to determine the safety of such a strategy by retrospectively analyzing bleeding in 100 consecutive patients with previously implanted coronary stents who were bridged to surgery with eptifibatide after discontinuing thienopyridine therapy. A propensity-matched control comparison was performed for a subgroup of 71 patients who underwent cardiovascular surgery. Blood transfusions were required in 65% in the bridged group versus 66% in the control group (p = 0.86). The mean numbers of units transfused were 4.84 ± 6.93 and 3.65 ± 7.46, respectively (p >0.25). Rates of return to the operating room for bleeding or tamponade were 10% and 2.9%, respectively (p = 0.085). Increased rates of transfusion were noted for patients who received concomitant aspirin and/or intravenous heparin infusion. In conclusion, there does not appear to be any increase in the need for blood transfusions or rate of return to the operating room for patients being bridged with eptifibatide when thienopyridines are discontinued in the perioperative period, but concomitant use of additional antiplatelet or anticoagulant agents may increase transfusions and delays to surgery. Clinicians who are considering this strategy must weigh the risks of stent thrombosis versus bleeding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Results from the COORDINATE-Diabetes trial (Coordinating Cardiology Clinics Randomized Trial of Interventions to Improve Outcomes - Diabetes) demonstrated that a multifaceted, clinic-based intervention increased prescription of evidence-based medical therapies to participants with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. This secondary analysis assessed whether intervention success was consistent across sex, race, and ethnicity., Methods: COORDINATE-Diabetes, a cluster randomized trial, recruited participants from 43 US cardiology clinics (20 randomized to intervention and 23 randomized to usual care). The primary outcome was the proportion of participants prescribed all 3 groups of evidence-based therapy (high-intensity statin, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist) at last trial assessment (6 to 12 months). In this prespecified analysis, mixed-effects logistic regression models were used to assess the outcome by self-reported sex, race, and ethnicity in the intervention and usual care groups, with adjustment for baseline characteristics, medications, comorbidities, and site location., Results: Among 1045 participants with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, the median age was 70 years, 32% were female, 16% were Black, and 9% were Hispanic. At the last trial assessment, there was an absolute increase in the proportion of participants prescribed all 3 groups of evidence-based therapy in women (36% versus 15%), Black participants (41% versus 18%), and Hispanic participants (46% versus 18%) with the intervention compared with usual care, with consistent benefit across sex (male versus female; P interaction =0.44), race (Black versus White; P interaction =0.59), and ethnicity (Hispanic versus Non-Hispanic; P interaction = 0.78)., Conclusions: The COORDINATE-Diabetes intervention successfully improved delivery of evidence-based care, regardless of sex, race, or ethnicity. Widespread dissemination of this intervention could improve equitable health care quality, particularly among women and minority communities who are frequently underrepresented in clinical trials., Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03936660., Competing Interests: Dr Tannu has received funding from the National Institutes of Health (T32HL069749). Dr Pagidipati reported receiving personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Merck, and CRISPR Therapeutics and receiving grants from Amgen, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Eggland’s Best. Dr Nelson reported receiving personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Novartis, and Sanofi. Dr McGuire reported receiving personal fees from Duke Clinical Research Institute, AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk, Esperion Therapeutics, Lilly, CSL Behring, Afimmune, Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck, Pfizer, Bayer, Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Altimmune, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, and Applied Therapeutics. Dr Pop-Busui reported receiving personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Procter & Gamble, and Lexicon Pharmaceuticals; receiving grants from JDRF (formerly the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation), Novo Nordisk, and Medtronic; and being on the board of directors and president of medicine and science for the American Diabetes Association. Dr Cavender reported receiving personal fees from Duke Clinical Research Institute, Novo Nordisk, Bayer, Medtronic, Boehringer Ingleheim, Zoll, Merck, Amgen, and Edwards Lifesciences and receiving grants from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Amgen, CSL Behring, and Boehringer-Ingelheim. Dr Aroda reported receiving personal fees from Duke Clinical Research Institute, Applied Therapeutics, Pfizer, Fractyl Health, Lilly, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi and that her spouse is an employee of Janssen Pharmaceuticals and receives salary and employee benefits. Dr Richardson reported receiving grants from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and the Nielsen Foundation and receiving personal fees from the Annals of Family Medicine for serving as a diabetes editor. Dr Lingvay reported receiving grants from Novo Nordisk, Boehringer Ingelheim, Sanofi, Structure Therapeutics, Merck, Pfizer, and Mylan and receiving personal fees from Novo Nordisk, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, Sanofi, Zealand Pharma, Target RWE, Shionogi & Co, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, Carmot Therapeutics, Altimmune, Merck, Valeritas, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, and Bayer. Dr Al-Khalidi reported receiving personal fees from Medpace Holdings Inc and CSL Behring. T. Gaynor reported being an employee of Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Dr Pak reported being an employee of Eli Lilly and Co. Dr Lopes reported receiving personal fees from Bayer, Boehringer Ingleheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, GSK (formerly GlaxoSmithKline), Medtronic, Merck, Pfizer, Portola Pharmaceuticals, and Sanofi and receiving grants from Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, Medtronic, Pfizer, and Sanofi. Dr Green reported receiving personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, Bayer, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Hawthorne Effect, Omada Health, Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Valo Therapeutics, and Anji Pharmaceuticals and receiving grants from Merck, Roche, Sanofi, and Lexicon Pharmaceuticals. Dr Granger reported receiving personal fees from AbbVie, Abiomed, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Anthos Therapeutics, Bayer, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardionomic, CeleCor Therapeutics, Cadrenal Therapeutics, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Medscape, Medtronic, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Novartis, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, Philips, Reata Pharmaceuticals, and NephroSynergy; receiving grants from Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Pfizer, and Philips; and having equity in Tenac.io. The other authors reported no conflicts. This research was made possible in part by a collaborative grant with Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc and Lilly USA, LLC, which provided financial support for the study. The authors meet criteria for authorship as recommended by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and were fully responsible for all aspects of the trial and publication development.

Introduction: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) share a complex and dependent link with each other and other cardiometabolic conditions. Currently, there is insufficient data regarding patient and provider perceptions about this important clinical overlap. This study sought to evaluate healthcare provider (HCP) and patient attitudes and perceptions about CKD and ASCVD, including risk, diagnosis, and management of both conditions., Methods: Cross-sectional surveys of 58 nephrologists and 74 cardiologists who treat patients with CKD and ASCVD and 195 patients who self-reported having CKD and ASCVD were conducted in the USA between May and June 2021., Results: Most nephrologists agreed that the presence of cardiometabolic comorbidities increased patients' risk of developing CKD; 86% agreed that type 2 diabetes increased the risk, and 67% agreed that ASCVD increased the risk. However, only 52% of the nephrologists reported they typically discuss the risk of developing CKD with patients prior to diagnosing them. Slightly more than one-third of patients (35%) reported their HCP discussed other conditions' impact on the development of CKD; of all HCPs surveyed, nephrologists were the least likely to discuss CKD risk with their patients. Most nephrologists (83%) also reported they recommended lifestyle modification to patients; however, only about half of patients (53%) reported they were currently using a lifestyle change to treat CKD and/or ASCVD., Conclusion: Although CKD and ASCVD are known to have a bidirectional relationship, HCPs in our study did not report routinely educating patients about the risk of developing one or both conditions. As HCPs with perhaps the deepest understanding of the interplay between CKD and cardiorenal comorbidities, nephrologists are well positioned to help patients understand the link between cardiovascular and renal health, help identify strategies to limit risk, and appropriately treat the conditions., (© 2024 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Objectives: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) are closely linked conditions, and the presence of each condition promotes incidence and progression of the other. In this study, we sought to better understand the medical journey of patients with CKD and ASCVD and to uncover patients' and healthcare providers' (HCPs) perceptions and attitudes toward CKD and ASCVD diagnosis, treatment, and care coordination., Methods: Cross-sectional, US-population-based online surveys were conducted between May 18, 2021, and June 17, 2021, among 239 HCPs (70 of whom were primary care physicians, or PCPs) and 195 patients with CKD and ASCVD., Results: PCPs reported personally diagnosing CKD in 78% and ASVD in 64% of their patients, respectively. PCPs reported they are more likely to serve as the overall coordinator of their patient's care (89%), while slightly more than half of PCPs self-identified as a patient's coordinator of care specifically for CKD (54%) or ASCVD (59%). In contrast, patients viewed their PCP as their coordinator of care for CKD (25%) or ASCVD (9%). PCPs who personally treated patients with CKD and ASCVD most often recalled primarily prescribing or recommending pharmacologic treatments for CKD and ASCVD; however, patients reported that lifestyle modification was the most common treatment modality they had ever used to manage CKD and ASCVD., Conclusion: CKD and ASCVD are interrelated cardiometabolic conditions with underlying risk factors that can be managed in a primary care setting. However, few patients in our study considered their PCP to be the coordinator of their care for CKD or ASCVD. PCPs can and should take a more active role in educating patients and coordinating care for those with CKD and ASCVD.

Objective: Physical activity (PA) is an important clinical and quality of life outcome after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). We examined the effect of TAVR on objectively measured PA in patients with cardiac implanted electronic devices (CIEDs)., Methods: Daily accelerometer data was obtained from CIEDs. Patients in the University of North Carolina Health System with continuous PA data at least 6 months before TAVR and 12 months after TAVR were included. Changes in activity pre- and post-TAVR were analyzed with linear mixed-effects models using a random intercept for each patient. An interaction term was included to determine differences in PA between men and women pre- and post-TAVR., Results: Of the 306 patients with CIEDs who underwent TAVR, 24,655 patient-days of data from 46 patients, mean age of 82 years old, 44% of whom were female met inclusion criteria. A significant and sustained increase of 14.7% in daily PA was seen after TAVR [10.15 minutes per day, 95% confidence interval (CI) 8.75 to 11.56 P < .001] after adjusting for sex, obesity, race, history of depression, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Effects were more prominent in women (18.57 [95% CI 16.36 to 20.79, P < .001] minute increase post-TAVR) compared to men (4.51 [95% CI 3.87 to 5.16] minute increase post-TAVR, P < .001)., Conclusions: This study demonstrates PA increases after TAVR with effects more pronounced in women than men. Further, this study highlights the potential use of remote monitoring data for monitoring functional outcomes in device patients after a procedure.

Importance: Evidence-based therapies to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk in adults with type 2 diabetes are underused in clinical practice., Objective: To assess the effect of a coordinated, multifaceted intervention of assessment, education, and feedback vs usual care on the proportion of adults with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease prescribed all 3 groups of recommended, evidence-based therapies (high-intensity statins, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors [ACEIs] or angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs], and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 [SGLT2] inhibitors and/or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists [GLP-1RAs])., Design, Setting, and Participants: Cluster randomized clinical trial with 43 US cardiology clinics recruiting participants from July 2019 through May 2022 and follow-up through December 2022. The participants were adults with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease not already taking all 3 groups of evidence-based therapies., Interventions: Assessing local barriers, developing care pathways, coordinating care, educating clinicians, reporting data back to the clinics, and providing tools for participants (n = 459) vs usual care per practice guidelines (n = 590)., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of participants prescribed all 3 groups of recommended therapies at 6 to 12 months after enrollment. The secondary outcomes included changes in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk factors and a composite outcome of all-cause death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction, stroke, decompensated heart failure, or urgent revascularization (the trial was not powered to show these differences)., Results: Of 1049 participants enrolled (459 at 20 intervention clinics and 590 at 23 usual care clinics), the median age was 70 years and there were 338 women (32.2%), 173 Black participants (16.5%), and 90 Hispanic participants (8.6%). At the last follow-up visit (12 months for 97.3% of participants), those in the intervention group were more likely to be prescribed all 3 therapies (173/457 [37.9%]) vs the usual care group (85/588 [14.5%]), which is a difference of 23.4% (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 4.38 [95% CI, 2.49 to 7.71]; P < .001) and were more likely to be prescribed each of the 3 therapies (change from baseline in high-intensity statins from 66.5% to 70.7% for intervention vs from 58.2% to 56.8% for usual care [adjusted OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.06-2.83]; ACEIs or ARBs: from 75.1% to 81.4% for intervention vs from 69.6% to 68.4% for usual care [adjusted OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.14-2.91]; SGLT2 inhibitors and/or GLP-1RAs: from 12.3% to 60.4% for intervention vs from 14.5% to 35.5% for usual care [adjusted OR, 3.11; 95% CI, 2.08-4.64]). The intervention was not associated with changes in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk factors. The composite secondary outcome occurred in 23 of 457 participants (5%) in the intervention group vs 40 of 588 participants (6.8%) in the usual care group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.46 to 1.33])., Conclusions and Relevance: A coordinated, multifaceted intervention increased prescription of 3 groups of evidence-based therapies in adults with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03936660.

Importance: The underuse of oral anticoagulation in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) is a major issue that is not well understood., Objective: To understand the lack of anticoagulation by assessing the perceptions of patients with AF who are not receiving anticoagulation and their physician's about the risk of stroke and the benefits and risks of anticoagulation., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included patients with nonvalvular AF and a CHA2DS2-VASc score of 2 or more (calculated as congestive heart failure, hypertension, age 75 years and older, diabetes, stroke or transient ischemic attack, vascular disease, age 65 to 74 years, and sex category) who were not receiving anticoagulation and were enrolled from 19 sites within the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence Registry (PINNACLE Registry) between January 18, 2017, and May 7, 2018. Data were collected from January 18, 2017, to September 30, 2019, and analyzed from April 2022 to March 2023., Exposure: Each patient enrolled in the study completed a survey, and their treating physician then conducted a clinical review of their care., Main Outcomes and Measures: Assessment of willingness for anticoagulation treatment and its appropriateness after central review by a panel of 4 cardiologists. Use of anticoagulation at 1 year follow-up was compared vs similar patients at other centers in the PINNACLE Registry., Results: Of the 817 patients enrolled, the median (IQR) age was 76.0 (69.0-83.0) years, 369 (45.2%) were women, and the median (IQR) CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.0 (3.0-6.0). The top 5 reasons physicians cited for no anticoagulation were low AF burden or successful rhythm control (278 [34.0%]), patient refusal (272 [33.3%]), perceived low risk of stroke (206 [25.2%]), fall risk (175 [21.4%]), and high bleeding risk (167 [20.4%]). After rereview, 221 physicians (27.1%) would reconsider prescribing oral anticoagulation as compared with 311 patients (38.1%), including 67 (24.6%) whose physician cited patient refusal. Of 647 patients (79.2%) adjudicated as appropriate or may be appropriate for anticoagulation, physicians would reconsider anticoagulation for only 177 patients (21.2%), while 527 patients (64.5%) would either agree to starting anticoagulation (311 [38.1%]) or were neutral (216 [27.3%]) to starting anticoagulation. Upon follow-up, 119 patients (14.6%) in the BOAT-AF study were prescribed anticoagulation, as compared with 55 879 of 387 975 similar patients (14.4%) at other centers in the PINNACLE Registry., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that patients with AF who are not receiving anticoagulation are more willing to consider anticoagulation than their physicians. These data emphasize the need to revisit any prior decision against anticoagulation in a shared decision-making manner.

Background: Few studies characterize the epidemiology and outcomes of aortic stenosis (AS) in acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). This study investigates the significance of AS in contemporary patients who have experienced an ADHF hospitalization., Methods: The ARIC study (Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities) surveilled ADHF hospitalizations for residents ≥55 years of age in 4 US communities. ADHF cases were stratified by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Demographic differences in AS burden and the association of varying AS severities with mortality were estimated using multivariable logistic regression., Results: From 2005 through 2014, there were 3597 (weighted n=16 692) ADHF hospitalizations of which 48.6% had an LVEF <50% and 51.4% an LVEF ≥50%. AS prevalence was 12.1% and 18.7% in those with an LVEF <50% and ≥50%, respectively. AS was less likely in Black than White patients regardless of LVEF: LVEF <50% (odds ratio [OR], 0.34 [95% CI, 0.28-0.42]); LVEF ≥50% (OR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.44-0.59]). Higher AS severity was independently associated with 1-year mortality in both LVEF subgroups: LVEF <50% (OR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.04-1.28]); LVEF ≥50% (OR, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.28-1.54]). Sensitivity analyses excluding severe AS patients detected that mild/moderate AS was independently associated with 1-year mortality in both LVEF subgroups: LVEF <50% (OR, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.02-1.47]); LVEF ≥50% (OR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.14-1.51])., Conclusions: Among patients who have experienced an ADHF hospitalization, AS is prevalent and portends poor mortality outcomes. Notably, mild/moderate AS is independently associated with 1-year mortality in this high-risk population.

Several medications that are proven to reduce cardiovascular events exist for individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, however they are substantially underused in clinical practice. Clinician, patient, and system-level barriers all contribute to these gaps in care; yet, there is a paucity of high quality, rigorous studies evaluating the role of interventions to increase utilization. The COORDINATE-Diabetes trial randomized 42 cardiology clinics across the United States to either a multifaceted, site-specific intervention focused on evidence-based care for patients with T2DM or standard of care. The multifaceted intervention comprised the development of an interdisciplinary care pathway for each clinic, audit-and-feedback tools and educational outreach, in addition to patient-facing tools. The primary outcome is the proportion of individuals with T2DM prescribed three key classes of evidence-based medications (high-intensity statin, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker, and either a sodium/glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT-2i) inhibitor or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) and will be assessed at least 6 months after participant enrollment. COORDINATE-Diabetes aims to identify strategies that improve the implementation and adoption of evidence-based therapies., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest None reported, (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The epidemiology of mitral stenosis (MS) continues to evolve in the United States. Although the incidence of rheumatic MS has decreased in high-income countries, there is a paucity of data surrounding trends in percutaneous balloon mitral valvuloplasty (PBMV), the current first-line management strategy. This study aimed to identify contemporary trends in PBMV in the United States. Hospitalizations for adults (≥18 years) with MS who underwent PBMV were identified from the National Inpatient Sample from 2008 to 2018. Baseline co-morbidities and outcomes over the study period were determined using Poisson regression. There were 3,980 weighted PBMV cases, 70% of which were women. PBMV hospitalizations decreased from 603 in 2008 to 210 in 2018 (p &lt;0.001). From 2008 to 2018, the age at hospitalization was unchanged in both female and male patients. In contrast, the Charlson Co-morbidity Index increased in both. Baseline heart failure (39% to 64%), hypertension (38% to 43%), and diabetes mellitus (17% to 26%) all substantially increased over the study period. In-hospital mortality occurred in 2% of female and 5% of male patients and was unchanged from 2008 to 2018. Vascular complications (12%) and acute kidney injury (10%) were the most frequent postprocedural complications during the 11-year study period. A composite of mortality or any postprocedural complication did not vary by gender (odds ratio 1.23, 95% confidence interval 0.88 to 1.72). In conclusion, the use of PBMV significantly decreased from 2008 to 2018, and patients with MS who underwent PBMV over this period had an increased burden of co-morbidities, elevated postprocedural complication rate, and no change in in-hospital mortality., Competing Interests: Disclosures The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Individuals with type 2 diabetes are at increased risk of both renal and cardiovascular events. The convergence of type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and cardiovascular disease, including heart failure, requires management by a multidisciplinary health care team. Primary care clinicians are likely to be the first and most frequent point of contact for individuals with type 2 diabetes who are at high risk of cardiorenal disease and therefore play a pivotal role in early diagnosis, establishment of effective treatment strategies, and coordination of care. This article presents a clinical perspective with multidisciplinary collaboration on a patient case representative of those seen in routine clinical practice. The authors assess reasons why patients may not receive evidence-based care and identify opportunities to initiate therapies that reduce cardiovascular and renal events in the primary care setting., (© 2022 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Importance: Based on contemporary estimates in the US, evidence-based therapies for cardiovascular risk reduction are generally underused among patients with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD)., Objective: To determine the use of evidence-based cardiovascular preventive therapies in a broad US population with diabetes and ASCVD., Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter cohort study used health system-level aggregated data within the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network, including 12 health systems. Participants included patients with diabetes and established ASCVD (ie, coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular disease, and peripheral artery disease) between January 1 and December 31, 2018. Data were analyzed from September 2020 until January 2021., Exposures: One or more health care encounters in 2018., Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient characteristics by prescription of any of the following key evidence-based therapies: high-intensity statin, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) and sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2I) or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA)., Results: The overall cohort included 324 706 patients, with a mean (SD) age of 68.1 (12.2) years and 144 169 (44.4%) women and 180 537 (55.6%) men. A total of 59 124 patients (18.2% ) were Black, and 41 470 patients (12.8%) were Latinx. Among 205 885 patients with specialized visit data from the prior year, 17 971 patients (8.7%) visited an endocrinologist, 54 330 patients (26.4%) visited a cardiologist, and 154 078 patients (74.8%) visited a primary care physician. Overall, 190 277 patients (58.6%) were prescribed a statin, but only 88 426 patients (26.8%) were prescribed a high-intensity statin; 147 762 patients (45.5%) were prescribed an ACEI or ARB, 12 724 patients (3.9%) were prescribed a GLP-1RA, and 8989 patients (2.8%) were prescribed an SGLT2I. Overall, 14 918 patients (4.6%) were prescribed all 3 classes of therapies, and 138 173 patients (42.6%) were prescribed none. Patients who were prescribed a high-intensity statin were more likely to be men (59.9% [95% CI, 59.6%-60.3%] of patients vs 55.6% [95% CI, 55.4%-55.8%] of patients), have coronary atherosclerotic disease (79.9% [95% CI, 79.7%-80.2%] of patients vs 73.0% [95% CI, 72.8%-73.3%] of patients) and more likely to have seen a cardiologist (40.0% [95% CI, 39.6%-40.4%] of patients vs 26.4% [95% CI, 26.2%-26.6%] of patients)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this large cohort of US patients with diabetes and ASCVD, fewer than 1 in 20 patients were prescribed all 3 evidence-based therapies, defined as a high-intensity statin, either an ACEI or ARB, and either an SGLT2I and/or a GLP-1RA. These findings suggest that multifaceted interventions are needed to overcome barriers to the implementation of evidence-based therapies and facilitate their optimal use.

Background: p38 mitogen activated kinase (MAPK) mediates the response to pro-inflammatory cytokines following myocardial infarction (MI) and is inhibited by losmapimod., Methods: LATITUDE-TIMI 60 (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02145468) randomized patients with MI to losmapimod or placebo for 12 weeks (24 weeks total follow-up). In this pre-specified analysis, we examined outcomes based on MI type [ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI) (865, 25%) and non-STEMI (2624, 75%)]., Results: In patients with STEMI, inflammation, measured by hs-CRP, was significantly attenuated with losmapimod at 48 hours (P <0.001) and week 12 (P = 0.01). Losmapimod lowered NT-proBNP in patients with STEMI at 48 hours (P = 0.04) and week 12 (P = 0.02). The effects of losmapimod on CV death (CVD), MI, or severe recurrent ischemia requiring urgent coronary artery revascularization at 24 weeks [MACE] differed in patients with STEMI (7.0% vs 10.8%; HR 0.65, 95%CI 0.41 - 1.03; P= 0.06) and NSTEMI (11.4% vs 8.5%; HR 1.30, 95%CI 1.02 - 1.66; P = 0.04; p[int] = 0.009). CVD or HHF among patients with STEMI were 5.6% (losmapimod) and 8.3% (placebo) (HR 0.66; 95%CI 0.40 - 1.11; P = 0.12) and in NSTEMI were 4.8% (losmapimod) and 4.4% (placebo) (HR 1.09; 95%CI 0.76 - 1.56) in patients with NSTEMI., Conclusions: Patients with STEMI treated with losmapimod had an attenuated inflammatory response. Our collective findings raise the hypothesis that mitigating the inflammatory response may result in different outcomes in patients with STEMI and NSTEMI. While the difference in outcomes is exploratory, these findings do support separate examination of patients with STEMI and NSTEMI and increased emphasis on heart failure in future investigation of modulators of inflammation in MI., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Thrombotic events are reduced with cangrelor, an intravenous P2Y 12 inhibitor. We sought to characterize the timing, number, and type of early events (within 2 hours of randomization) in CHAMPION PHOENIX (A Clinical Trial Comparing Cangrelor to Clopidogrel Standard of Care Therapy in Subjects Who Require Percutaneous Coronary Intervention)., Methods: CHAMPION PHOENIX was a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that randomized patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention to cangrelor or clopidogrel. For this analysis, we evaluated the efficacy of cangrelor in the first 2 hours postrandomization with regards to the primary end point (death, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, or stent thrombosis). Sensitivity analyses were performed evaluating a secondary, post hoc end point (death, Society of Coronary Angiography and Intervention myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, or Academic Research Consortium definite stent thrombosis)., Results: The majority of events (63%) that occurred in the trial occurred within 2 hours of randomization. The most common early event was myocardial infarction; next were stent thrombosis, ischemia driven revascularization, and death. In the first 2 hours after randomization, cangrelor significantly decreased the primary composite end point compared with clopidogrel (4.1% versus 5.4%; hazard ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.64-0.90], P =0.002). Similar findings were seen for the composite end point of death, Society of Coronary Angiography and Intervention myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, or Academic Research Consortium stent thrombosis at 2 hours (0.9% versus 1.6%; hazard ratio, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.40-0.80], P =0.001). Between 2 and 48 hours, there was no difference in the primary composite end point (0.6% versus 0.5%; odds ratio, 1.17 [95% CI, 0.71-1.93]; P =0.53). Early (≤2 hours of randomization) GUSTO (Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries) moderate or severe bleeding events were infrequent, and there was no significant difference with cangrelor compared with clopidogrel (0.2% [n=10] versus 0.1% [n=4]; adjusted odds ratio, 1.41 [95% CI, 0.37-5.40]; P =0.62)., Conclusions: The reductions in ischemic events and overall efficacy seen with cangrelor in CHAMPION PHOENIX occurred early and during the period of time in which patients were being actively treated with cangrelor. These findings provide evidence that supports the importance of potent platelet inhibition during percutaneous coronary intervention. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01156571.

Background: The fourth universal definition of myocardial infarction requires an increase or decrease in cardiac troponin for the classification of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. We sought to determine whether the characteristics, management, and outcomes of patients admitted with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction differ by the initial biomarker pattern., Methods: We identified patients in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Surveillance Study admitted with chest pain and an initially elevated cardiac troponin I, who presented within 12 hours of symptom onset and were classified with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. A change in cardiac troponin I required an absolute difference of at least 0.02 ng/mL on the first day of hospitalization, prior to invasive cardiac procedures., Results: A total of 1926 hospitalizations met the inclusion criteria, with increasing cardiac troponin I more commonly observed (78%). Patients with decreasing cardiac troponin I were more often black (45% vs. 35%) and women (54% vs. 40%), and were less likely to receive non-aspirin antiplatelets (44% vs. 63%), lipid-lowering agents (62% vs. 80%), and invasive angiography (38% vs. 64%). Inhospital mortality was 3%, irrespective of the cardiac troponin I pattern. However, patients with decreasing cardiac troponin I had twice the 28-day mortality (12% vs. 5%; P=0.01). Fatalities within 28 days were more often attributable to non-cardiovascular causes in those with decreasing versus increasing cardiac troponin I (75% vs. 38%; P=0.01)., Conclusion: Patients presenting with chest pain and an initially elevated cardiac troponin I which subsequently decreases are less often managed by evidence-based therapies and have greater mortality, primarily driven by non-cardiovascular causes. Whether associations are attributable to type 2 myocardial infarction or a subacute presentation merits further investigation., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2019. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: We sought to test the hypothesis that patients undergoing ultrasound-assisted catheter-directed thrombolysis (USAT) with standard alteplase and heparin dosing would not develop significant depletion of systemic fibrinogen, which may account for the lower risk of bleeding seen in contemporary trials. We also sought to compare the relative outcomes of individuals with submassive pulmonary embolism (PE) undergoing USAT and anticoagulation alone., Methods: Utilizing a single-center prospective registry, we identified 102 consecutive adult patients with submassive PE who were considered for USAT based on a standardized treatment algorithm between November 2016 and May 2019. Patients not receiving USAT therapy were treated with anticoagulation alone., Results: Baseline characteristics were generally similar between groups (n = 51 in each group). Major bleeding rates were not significantly different between groups (2.0% vs 5.9% in USAT vs control, respectively; P=.62). Notably, no USAT patient experienced clinically significant hypofibrinogenemia (mean trough fibrinogen, 369.8 ± 127.1 mg/dL; minimum, 187 mg/dL). The mean trough fibrinogen of patients experiencing any bleeding event (major or minor) was 306.6 mg/dL (SE, 23.9 mg/dL) vs 380.3 mg/dL (SE, 20.4 mg/dL) in those without a bleeding event (P=.02)., Conclusions: In this cohort analysis of patients undergoing USAT, there was no evidence for clinically significant depletion of fibrinogen or intracranial hemorrhage. Although our data suggest an association between lower fibrinogen levels and bleeding events, our results are not clear enough to suggest a clinically useful fibrinogen cut-off value. Further study is needed to determine the utility of routine fibrinogen monitoring in this population.

Background: Randomized, controlled cardiovascular outcome trials may not be fully representative of the management of patients with type 2 diabetes across different geographic regions. We conducted analyses of data from the multinational CVD-REAL consortium to determine the association between initiation of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) and cardiovascular outcomes, including subgroup analyses based on patient characteristics., Methods: De-identified health records from 13 countries across three continents were used to identify patients newly-initiated on SGLT-2i or other glucose-lowering drugs (oGLDs). Propensity scores for SGLT-2i initiation were developed in each country, with 1:1 matching for oGLD initiation. In the matched groups hazard ratios (HRs) for hospitalization for heart failure (HHF), all-cause death (ACD), the composite of HHF or ACD, myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke were estimated by country, and pooled using a weighted meta-analysis. Multiple subgroup analyses were conducted across patient demographic and clinical characteristics to examine any heterogeneity in treatment effects., Results: Following matching, 440,599 new users of SGLT-2i and oGLDs were included in each group. Mean follow-up time was 396 days for SGLT-2i initiation and 406 days for oGLDs initiation. SGLT-2i initiation was associated with a lower risk of HHF (HR: 0.66, 95%CI 0.58-0.75; p < 0.001), ACD (HR: 0.52, 95%CI 0.45-0.60; p < 0.001), the composite of HHF or ACD (HR: 0.60, 95%CI 0.53-0.68; p < 0.001), MI (HR: 0.85, 95%CI 0.78-0.92; p < 0.001), and stroke (HR: 0.78, 95%CI 0.72-0.85; p < 0.001); regardless of patient characteristics, including established cardiovascular disease, or geographic region., Conclusions: This CVD-REAL study extends the findings from the SGLT-2i clinical trials to the broader setting of an ethnically and geographically diverse population, and across multiple subgroups. Trial registration NCT02993614., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Standardization of risk is critical in benchmarking and quality improvement efforts for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs). In 2018, the CathPCI Registry was updated to include additional variables to better classify higher-risk patients., Objectives: This study sought to develop a model for predicting in-hospital mortality risk following PCI incorporating these additional variables., Methods: Data from 706,263 PCIs performed between July 2018 and June 2019 at 1,608 sites were used to develop and validate a new full and pre-catheterization model to predict in-hospital mortality, and a simplified bedside risk score. The sample was randomly split into a development cohort (70%, n = 495,005) and a validation cohort (30%, n = 211,258). The authors created 1,000 bootstrapped samples of the development cohort and used stepwise selection logistic regression on each sample. The final model included variables that were selected in at least 70% of the bootstrapped samples and those identified a priori due to clinical relevance., Results: In-hospital mortality following PCI varied based on clinical presentation. Procedural urgency, cardiovascular instability, and level of consciousness after cardiac arrest were most predictive of in-hospital mortality. The full model performed well, with excellent discrimination (C-index: 0.943) in the validation cohort and good calibration across different clinical and procedural risk cohorts. The median hospital risk-standardized mortality rate was 1.9% and ranged from 1.1% to 3.3% (interquartile range: 1.7% to 2.1%)., Conclusions: The risk of mortality following PCI can be predicted in contemporary practice by incorporating variables that reflect clinical acuity. This model, which includes data previously not captured, is a valid instrument for risk stratification and for quality improvement efforts., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This research was supported by the American College of Cardiology Foundation’s National Cardiovascular Data Registry. The views expressed represent those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official views of the National Cardiovascular Data Registry or its associated professional societies. Mr. Wang and Dr. Minges have received salary support for analytic services provided to the American College of Cardiology. Dr. Spertus has served as the principal investigator of a Data Analytic Center for the American College of Cardiology Foundation National Cardiovascular Data Registry, related to this work; has served as a consultant on PROs to Novartis, Amgen, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, and Myokardia, unrelated to this work; has served on the scientific advisory board for United Healthcare; owns the copyright to the Seattle Angina Questionnaire, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, and Peripheral Artery Questionnaire; and has served on the Board of Directors for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City. Dr. Messenger has received research support to his institution from Philips Medical Systems. Dr. Clary has received research support to her institution from Novartis and Boehringer Ingelheim; and has received consulting fees from Allergan. Dr. Curtis has a contract with the American College of Cardiology for his role as Senior Medical Officer, National Cardiovascular Data Registry; has received salary support from the American College of Cardiology, National Cardiovascular Data Registry; and holds equity interest in Medtronic. Dr. Cavender has received research support to his institution from Amgen, AstraZeneca, CSL Behring, and Novartis; and has received consulting fees from Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Edwards Lifesciences, Merck, and Novo Nordisk., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Multiple sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) have been shown to impart significant cardiovascular and kidney benefits, but are underused in clinical practice. Both SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA were first studied as glucose-lowering drugs, which may have impeded uptake by cardiologists in the wake of proven cardiovascular efficacy. Their significant effect on cardiovascular and kidney outcomes, which are largely independent of glucose-lowering effects, must drive a broader use of these drugs. Cardiologists are 3 times more likely than endocrinologists to see patients with both type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, thus they are ideally positioned to share responsibility for SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA treatment with primary care providers. In order to increase adoption, SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA must be reframed as primarily cardiovascular and kidney disease risk-reducing agents with a side effect of glucose-lowering. Coordinated and multifaceted interventions engaging clinicians, patients, payers, professional societies, and health systems must be implemented to incentivize the adoption of these medications as part of routine cardiovascular and kidney care. Greater use of SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA will improve outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular and kidney disease.

This study of real-world data from the Maccabi database in Israel compared the risk of heart failure hospitalization (HHF) or death in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) initiating sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors versus other glucose-lowering drugs (OGLDs) according to baseline left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF). After propensity-matching patients by baseline EF there were 10 614 episodes of treatment initiation; 57% had diabetes for >10 years, the mean glycated haemoglobin level was 66 mmol/mol (8.2%), ∼43% had cardiovascular disease, ∼7% had heart failure and ∼ 20% had chronic kidney disease. A total of 2876 patients (∼9%) had reduced EF (<50%). Over a mean follow-up of 1.5 years there were 371 HHFs or deaths, 88 (23.7%) in patients with reduced EF. Initiation of SGLT2 inhibitors versus OGLDs was associated with lower risk of HHF or death overall (hazard ratio [HR] 0.57, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.46-0.70]; P < 0.001) and in patients with both reduced EF (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40-0.93) and preserved EF (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.43-0.70), with no significant heterogeneity (P interaction = 0.72). Our findings from real-world clinical practice show that the lower risk of HHF and death associated with use of SGLT2 inhibitors versus OGLDs is consistent in T2D patients with both reduced and preserved EF., (© 2021 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objectives: This study investigates the prevalence and prognostic significance of mitral regurgitation (MR) in acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) patients., Background: Few studies characterize the burden of MR in heart failure., Methods: The ARIC (Atherosclerosis Risk In Communities) study surveilled ADHF hospitalizations for residents ≥55 years of age in 4 U.S. communities. ADHF cases were stratified by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF): <50% and ≥50%. Odds of moderate or severe MR in patients with varying sex and race, and odds of 1-year mortality in those with higher MR severity were estimated using multivariable logistic regression., Results: From 2005 to 2014, there were 17,931 weighted ADHF hospitalizations of which 49.2% had an LVEF <50% and 50.8% an LVEF ≥50%. Moderate or severe MR prevalence was 44.5% in those with an LVEF <50% and 27.5% in those with an LVEF ≥50%. Moderate or severe MR was more likely in females than males regardless of LVEF; LVEF <50% (odds ratio [OR]: 1.21 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11 to 1.33]), LVEF ≥50% (OR: 1.52 [95% CI: 1.36 to 1.69]). Among hospitalizations with an LVEF ≥50%, moderate or severe MR was less likely in blacks than whites (OR: 0.72 [95% CI: 0.64 to 0.82]). Higher MR severity was independently associated with increased 1-year mortality in those with an LVEF <50% (OR: 1.30 [95% CI: 1.16 to 1.45])., Conclusions: Patients with ADHF have a significant MR burden that varies with sex and race. In ADHF patients with an LVEF <50%, higher MR severity is associated with excess 1-year mortality., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The ARIC study has been funded in whole or in part with Federal funds from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Department of Health and Human Services, under contract nos. HHSN268201700001I, HHSN268201700002I, HHSN268201700003I, HHSN268201700005I, and HHSN268201700004I. Dr. Qamar is supported by Daiichi Sankyo, the NIH T32 Program, and the American Heart Association Strategically Focused Research Networks in Vascular Disease grant. Dr. Vaduganathan is supported by the KL2/Catalyst Medical Research Investigator Training award from Harvard Catalyst NIH/NCATS Award UL 1TR002541. Dr. Vavalle is supported by a research grant from CSI Inc. Dr. Qamar has been an AD hoc consultant/speaker for the American College of Cardiology, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Pfizer, Medscape, and the Clinical Exercise Physiology Association. Dr. Vaduganathan has served on advisory boards for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Baxter Healthcare, Bayer AG, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, and Relypsa; and has participated on clinical endpoint committees for studies sponsored by Novartis and the NIH. Dr. Pandey has served as an advisory board member for Roche Diagnostics; and has also received research funding from the Texas Health Resources Clinical Scholarship, Gilead Sciences Research Scholar Program, and the National Institute of Aging GEMSSTAR Grant (1R03AG067960-01). Dr. Cavender has received non-salary research support from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Chiesi, CSL Behring, GlaxoSmithKline, and Novartis; salary research support from Novo-Nordisk; and consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, and Merck. Dr. Vavalle has been a principal investigator for Abbott Medical Device Company, Boston Scientific, and Cardiac Dimensions, Inc.; has received consulting fees from Edwards Lifesciences; and has an honorarium from ZOLL Medical Corporation. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The authors analyzed data from the NCDR (National Cardiovascular Data Registry) PVI Registry and defined acute kidney injury (AKI) as increased creatinine of ≥0.3 mg/dl or 50%, or a new requirement for dialysis after PVI., Background: AKI is an important and potentially modifiable complication of peripheral vascular intervention (PVI). The incidence, predictors, and outcomes of AKI after PVI are incompletely characterized., Methods: A hierarchical logistic regression risk model using pre-procedural characteristics associated with AKI was developed, followed by bootstrap validation. The model was validated with data submitted after model creation. An integer scoring system was developed to predict AKI after PVI., Results: Among 10,006 procedures, the average age of patients was 69 years, 58% were male, and 52% had diabetes. AKI occurred in 737 (7.4%) and was associated with increased in-hospital mortality (7.1% vs. 0.7%). Reduced glomerular filtration rate, hypertension, diabetes, prior heart failure, critical or acute limb ischemia, and pre-procedural hemoglobin were independently associated with AKI. The model to predict AKI showed good discrimination (optimism corrected c-statistic = 0.68) and calibration (corrected slope = 0.97, intercept of -0.07). The integer point system could be incorporated into a useful clinical tool because it discriminates risk for AKI with scores ≤4 and ≥12 corresponding to the lower and upper 20% of risk, respectively., Conclusions: AKI is not rare after PVI and is associated with in-hospital mortality. The NCDR PVI AKI risk model, including the integer scoring system, may prospectively estimate AKI risk and aid in deployment of strategies designed to reduce risk of AKI after PVI., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study was funded by a grant from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. Dr. Latif has received honoraria from Abbott Vascular, Inc. Dr. Shammas has received research and educational grants from Boston Scientific, Bard, VentureMed Group, Phillips, and Intact Vascular; and has served on speaker bureaus for Janssen, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Zoll Medical. Dr. Spertus has been the principal investigator of a contract from the American College of Cardiology Foundation to analyze the NCDR data; and has an equity interest in Health Outcomes Sciences. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Diabetes is the most frequent cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD), leading to nearly half of all cases of kidney failure requiring replacement therapy. The principal cause of death among patients with diabetes and CKD is cardiovascular disease (CVD). Sodium/glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors were developed to lower blood glucose levels by inhibiting glucose reabsorption in the proximal tubule. In clinical trials designed to demonstrate the CVD safety of SGLT2 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), consistent reductions in risks for secondary kidney disease end points (albuminuria and a composite of serum creatinine doubling or 40% estimated glomerular filtration rate decline, kidney failure, or death), along with reductions in CVD events, were observed. In patients with CKD, the kidney and CVD benefits of canagliflozin were established by the CREDENCE (Canagliflozin and Renal Events in Diabetes With Established Nephropathy Clinical Evaluation) trial in patients with T2DM, urinary albumin-creatinine ratio>300mg/g, and estimated glomerular filtration rate of 30 to<90mL/min/1.73m 2 . To clarify and support the role of SGLT2 inhibitors for treatment of T2DM and CKD, the National Kidney Foundation convened a scientific workshop with an international panel of more than 80 experts. They discussed the current state of knowledge and unanswered questions to propose therapeutic approaches and delineate future research. SGLT2 inhibitors improve glomerular hemodynamic function and are thought to ameliorate other local and systemic mechanisms involved in the pathogenesis of CKD and CVD. SGLT2 inhibitors should be used when possible by people with T2DM to reduce risks for CKD and CVD in alignment with the clinical trial entry criteria. Important risks of SGLT2 inhibitors include euglycemic ketoacidosis, genital mycotic infections, and volume depletion. Careful consideration should be given to the balance of benefits and harms of SGLT2 inhibitors and risk mitigation strategies. Effective implementation strategies are needed to achieve widespread use of these life-saving medications., (Copyright © 2020 The National Kidney Foundation, Inc and American Diabetes Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

As transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) continues its rapid growth as a treatment approach for aortic stenosis, costs associated with TAVI, and its burden to healthcare systems will assume greater importance. Patients undergoing TAVI between January 2012 and November 2017 in the Nationwide Readmission Database were identified. Trends in cause-specific readmissions were assessed using Poisson regression. Thirty-day TAVI cost burden (cost of index TAVI hospitalization plus total 30-day readmissions cost) was adjusted to 2017 U.S. dollars and trended over year from 2012 to 2017. Overall, 47,255 TAVI were included and 30-day readmissions declined from 20% to 12% (p <0.0001). Most common causes of readmission (heart failure, infection/sepsis, gastrointestinal causes, and respiratory) declined as well, except arrhythmia/heart block which increased (1.0% to 1.4%, p <0.0001). Cost of TAVI hospitalization ($52,024 to $44,110, p <0.0001) and 30-day cost burden ($54,122 to $45,252, p <0.0001) declined. Whereas costs of an average readmission did not change ($9,734 to $10,068, p = 0.06), cost burden of readmissions (per every TAVI performed) declined ($4,061 to $1,883, p <0.0001), including reductions in each of the top 5 causes except arrhythmia/heart block ($171 to $263, p = 0.04). Index TAVI hospitalizations complicated by acute kidney injury, length of stay ≥5 days, low hospital procedural volume, and skilled nursing facility discharge were associated with increased odds of 30-day readmissions. In conclusion, the costs of index hospitalizations and 30-day cost burden for TAVI in the U.S. significantly declined from 2012 to 2017. However, readmissions due to arrhythmia/heart block and their associated costs increased. Continued strategies to prevent readmissions, especially those for conduction disturbances, are crucial in the efforts to optimize outcomes and costs with the ongoing expansion of TAVI., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Cardiovascular outcome trials have shown cardiovascular benefit with sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes, whereas dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors have not shown an effect. We aimed to address knowledge gaps regarding the comparative effectiveness of SGLT2 inhibitor use in clinical practice (with DPP-4 inhibitor use as an active comparator) across a range of cardiovascular risks and in diverse geographical settings., Methods: In this comparative cohort study, we used data from clinical practice from 13 countries in the Asia-Pacific, Middle East, European, and North American regions to assess the risk of cardiovascular events and death in adult patients with type 2 diabetes newly initiated on SGLT2 inhibitors compared with those newly initiated on DPP-4 inhibitors. De-identified health records were used to select patients who were initiated on these drug classes between Dec 1, 2012, and May 1, 2016, with follow-up until Dec 31, 2014, to Nov 30, 2017 (full range; dates varied by country). Non-parsimonious propensity scores for SGLT2 inhibitor initiation were developed for each country and patients who were initiated on an SGLT2 inhibitor were matched with those who were initiated on a DPP-4 inhibitor in a 1:1 ratio. Outcomes assessed were hospitalisation for heart failure, all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated by country and then pooled in a weighted meta-analysis., Findings: Following propensity score matching, 193 124 new users of SGLT2 inhibitors and 193 124 new users of DPP-4 inhibitors were included in the study population. Participants had a mean age of 58 years (SD 12·2), 170 335 (44·1%) of 386 248 were women, and 111 933 (30·1%) of 372 262 had established cardiovascular disease. Initiation of an SGLT2 inhibitor versus a DPP-4 inhibitor was associated with substantially lower risks of hospitalisation for heart failure (HR 0·69, 95% CI 0·61-0·77; p<0·0001), all-cause death (0·59, 0·52-0·67; p<0·0001), and the composite of hospitalisation for heart failure or all-cause death (0·64, 0·57-0·72; p<0·0001). Risks of myocardial infarction (HR 0·88, 0·80-0·98; p=0·020) and stroke (0·85 0·77-0·93; p=0·0004) were significantly but modestly lower with SGLT2 inhibitors versus DPP-4 inhibitors., Interpretation: In this large, international, observational study, initiation of SGLT2 inhibitors versus DPP-4 inhibitors was associated with lower risks of heart failure, death, myocardial infarction, and stroke, providing further support for the cardiovascular benefits associated with use of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes., Funding: AstraZeneca., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Antiplatelet and anticoagulant medications are the cornerstone of therapy for patients with acute coronary syndrome and have also been shown to reduce recurrent cardiovascular events in patients with stable coronary disease. Whereas antiplatelet medications have been the preferred therapy for long-term secondary prevention, the development of novel oral anticoagulants has renewed interest in the use of anticoagulation to prevent atherosclerotic events. In patients with atrial fibrillation or other indications for anticoagulation, recent clinical trials have shown the benefit of double therapy with full-dose novel oral anticoagulants and P2Y12 inhibitors compared with regimens with vitamin K antagonists. In patients without an indication for anticoagulation, the use of low doses of the factor Xa inhibitor, rivaroxaban, has shown benefit. Clinicians have many pharmacological options when treating patients following percutaneous coronary intervention. This review discusses the evidence for the use of novel oral anticoagulants, with an emphasis on patient selection, choice of therapy, and appropriate dosing of anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents, in secondary prevention strategies for atherosclerosis following coronary revascularization for patients with and without a traditional indication for anticoagulation.

Background: THEMIS (NCT01991795) showed that in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and stable coronary artery disease (CAD) but with no prior myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke, ticagrelor plus acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) decreased the incidence of ischaemic cardiovascular events compared with placebo plus ASA. To complement these findings, we assessed disease burden and healthcare resource utilization (HRU) in US patients with CAD and T2D, but without a prior MI or stroke., Methods: This observational study used 2013-2014 data from the Diabetes Collaborative Registry linked to Medicare administrative claims. Two cohorts of patients with T2D were studied: patients at high cardiovascular risk (THEMIS-like cohort; N = 56 040) and patients at high cardiovascular risk or taking P2Y12 inhibitors (CAD-T2D cohort; N = 69 790). Outcomes included the composite of all-cause death, MI and stroke; the individual events from the composite endpoint; HRU; and costs., Results: Median age was 73.0 years, and median follow-up was 1.3 years in both cohorts. Event rates of the composite outcome were 16.34 (95% confidence interval: 16.31-16.37) and 17.64 (17.61-17.67) per 100 person-years for the THEMIS-like and CAD-T2D cohorts, respectively. The incidence rate of bleeding events was 0.13 events per 100 person-years in both cohorts. Healthcare costs per patient-year were USD 8741 and USD 9150 in the THEMIS-like and CAD-T2D cohorts, respectively., Conclusions: Patients in the THEMIS-like cohort and the broader CAD-T2D population had similarly substantial cardiovascular event rates and healthcare costs, indicating that patients with CAD and T2D similar to the THEMIS population are at an increased cardiovascular risk., Competing Interests: Eric Wittbrodt, Narinder Bhalla, Karolina Andersson Sundell, Phillip Hunt and Carl Mellström are employees of AstraZeneca (significant relationships). Qi Gao and Liyan Dong are employees of the Baim Institute for Clinical Research (significant relationships). Nathan Wong is a consultant for AstraZeneca (modest relationship). Matthew Cavender has received research support (nonsalary) from AstraZeneca, Bristol‐Myers Squibb, Chiesi, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Takeda and The Medicines Company, and research support with salary from Novo Nordisk; he has also received modest consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Edwards Lifesciences, Janssen, Merck and Sanofi‐Aventis., (© 2020 The Authors. Endocrinology, Diabetes & Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

While randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for comparative effectiveness research, they are unable to provide the answers to all pertinent clinical and research questions. Real world evidence (RWE), that is, clinical evidence obtained outside RCTs and often through routine clinical practice, offers the potential to conduct observational studies that accelerate advances in care, improve outcomes for patients, and provide important insights that can answer important questions. Once appropriate information technology is available, real world data can be cost-effective to generate. RWE serves a vital role in the evaluation of treatment strategies for which there are no RCTs and for describing patterns of care. RWE also serves as an important adjunct to RCTs and can be used to determine if benefits seen in RCTs extend to clinical practice, provide insight into the findings of RCTs, generate hypotheses for future RCTs, and inform the design of future RCTs. These potential benefits must be balanced against some of the important limitations of RWE, including variable data quality, lack of granularity for important clinical variables, and the potential for bias and confounding. By using appropriate analytic techniques and study design, these limitations can be minimized but not eliminated. Going forward, RWE studies may be enhanced by using rigorous data quality standards, incorporating randomization, developing more prospective registries, and better leveraging data from electronic health records., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)