Search

The EXTRACT-PE trial evaluated the safety and performance of the Indigo Aspiration System (Penumbra Inc.) with an 8F continuous mechanical aspiration thrombectomy system for the treatment of pulmonary embolism (PE). This subgroup analysis evaluates performance outcomes of patients with main pulmonary artery (PA) emboli versus discrete unilateral or bilateral PA emboli without main PA involvement.The EXTRACT-PE trial was a prospective, single-arm, multicenter trial that enrolled 119 patients with acute submassive PE. Emboli location was collected at the time of enrollment, CT obstruction was measured and assessed by a Core Lab, and patients were grouped on whether emboli involved the main PA (with or without branch vessels) or not (branch vessels alone). Procedural device time, changes in the right ventricle to left ventricle (RV/LV) ratio, and systolic PA pressure from pre-and posttreatment were compared between the two groups.Out of the 119 patients enrolled, 118 had core lab-assessed clot locations. Forty-five (38.1%) had emboli that involved the main PA and 73 (61.9%) had only branch emboli. No significant difference was observed between these groups for 30-day mortality, procedural device time, changes in RV/LV ratio, reduction in CT Obstruction Index, or for systolic PA pressure from pre-and posttreatment. The mean absolute reduction in clot burden was significant in both groups.Continuous mechanical aspiration thrombectomy with the 8F Indigo Aspiration System was effective at improving clinical outcomes for submassive PE patients regardless of emboli location, and clot burden was significantly reduced in both groups.

Background Histologic analyses of deep vein thrombi (DVTs) have used autopsy samples and animal models. To the best of our knowledge, no previous study has reported on thrombus composition after percutaneous mechanical extraction. Because elements of chronicity and organization render thrombus resistant to anticoagulation and thrombolysis, a better understanding of clot evolution could inform therapy. Methods We performed a histologic evaluation of DVTs from consecutive patients who had undergone mechanical thrombectomy for extensive iliofemoral DVTs using the Clottriever/Flowtriever device (Inari Medical, Irvine, Calif). The DVTs were scored using a semiquantitative method according to the degree of fibrosis (collagen deposition on trichrome staining) and organization (endothelial growth with capillaries and fibroblastic penetration). Results Twenty-three specimens were available for analysis, with 20 presenting as acute DVT (≤14 days from symptom onset). Of the 23 patients, 11 (48%) had had >5% fibrosis (ie, collagen deposition) and 14 (61%) had had >5% organization (ie, endothelial growth, capillaries, fibroblasts). Four patients with acute DVT had had ≥25% organized thrombus and two had had ≥25% collagen deposition. Of the 20 patients with acute DVT, 40% had had >5% fibrosis and 55% had had >5% organization. The acuity of DVT did not correlate with the amount of fibrosis or organizing scores. Conclusions A large proportion of patients with acute DVT will have histologic elements of chronicity and fibrosis. A better understanding of the relationship between such elements and the response to anticoagulant agents and fibrinolytic drugs could inform our approach to therapy.

Lung ultrasound (LUS) has gained considerable acceptance in emergency and critical care medicine but is yet to be fully implemented in cardiology. Standard imaging protocols for LUS in acute care settings have allowed the rapid and accurate diagnosis of dyspnea, respiratory failure, and shock. LUS is greatly additive to echocardiography and is superior to auscultation and chest radiography, particularly when the diagnosis of acute decompensated heart failure is in question. In this review, the authors describe LUS techniques, interpretation, and clinical applications, with the goal of informing cardiologists on the imaging modality. Additionally, the authors review LUS findings associated with various disease states most relevant to cardiac care. Although there is extensive literature on LUS in the acute care setting, there is a dearth of reviews directly focused for practicing cardiologists. Current evidence demonstrates that this modality is an important adjunct to echocardiography, providing valuable clinical information at the bedside.

Objective The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused devastating morbidity and mortality worldwide. In particular, thromboembolic complications have emerged as a key threat for patients with COVID-19. We assessed our experience with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in patients with COVID-19. Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients with COVID-19 who had undergone upper or lower extremity venous duplex ultrasonography at an academic health system in New York City from March 3, 2020 to April 12, 2020 with follow-up through May 12, 2020. A cohort of hospitalized patients without COVID-19 (non–COVID-19) who had undergone venous duplex ultrasonography from December 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019 was used for comparison. The primary outcome was DVT. The secondary outcomes included pulmonary embolism, in-hospital mortality, admission to the intensive care unit, and antithrombotic therapy. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify the risk factors for DVT and mortality. Results Of 443 patients (COVID-19, n = 188; and non–COVID-19, n = 255) who had undergone venous duplex ultrasonography, the COVID-19 cohort had had a greater incidence of DVT (31% vs 19%; P = .005) than had the non–COVID-19 cohort. The incidence of pulmonary embolism was not significantly different statistically between the COVID-19 and non–COVID-19 cohorts (8% vs 4%; P = .105). The DVT location in the COVID-19 group was more often distal (63% vs 29%; P < .001) and bilateral (15% vs 4%; P < .001). The duplex ultrasound findings had a significant impact on the antithrombotic plan; 42 patients (72%) with COVID-19 in the DVT group had their therapy escalated and 49 (38%) and 3 (2%) had their therapy escalated and deescalated in the non-DVT group, respectively (P < .001). Within the COVID-19 cohort, the D-dimer level was significantly greater in the DVT group at admission (2746 ng/mL vs 1481 ng/mL; P = .004) and at the duplex examination (6068 ng/mL vs 3049 ng/mL; P < .01). On multivariable analysis, male sex (odds ratio [OR], 2.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-4.87; P = .035), intensive care unit admission (OR, 3.42; 95% CI, 1.02-11.44; P = .046), and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (OR, 5.5; 95% CI, 1.01-30.13; P = .049) were independently associated with DVT. Conclusions Given the high incidence of venous thromboembolic events in this population, we support the decision to empirically initiate therapeutic anticoagulation for patients with a low bleeding risk and severe COVID-19 infection. Duplex ultrasonography should be reserved for patients with a high clinical suspicion of venous thromboembolism for whom anticoagulation therapy could result in life-threatening consequences. Further study of patients with COVID-19 is warranted to elucidate the etiology of vascular thromboembolic events and guide the prophylactic and therapeutic interventions for these patients.

Bileaflet mitral valve prolapse (Bi-MVP) is associated with increased risk for cardiac arrest. We describe a patient who presented after a cardiac arrest with Bi-MVP and variants in Lamin A/C (LMNA) and the sodium channel alpha-subunit 5a (SCN5A). Genetic variants may be the culprit for arrhythmogenesis in Bi-MVP patients. (Level of Difficulty: Intermediate.), Central Illustration

The coexistence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and pulmonary embolism (PE), two life-threatening illnesses, in the same patient presents a unique challenge. Guidelines have delineated how best to diagnose and manage patients with PE. However, the unique aspects of COVID-19 confound both the diagnosis and treatment of PE, and therefore require modification of established algorithms. Important considerations include adjustment of diagnostic modalities, incorporation of the prothrombotic contribution of COVID-19, management of two critical cardiorespiratory illnesses in the same patient, and protecting patients and health-care workers while providing optimal care. The benefits of a team-based approach for decision-making and coordination of care, such as that offered by pulmonary embolism response teams (PERTs), have become more evident in this crisis. The importance of careful follow-up care also is underscored for patients with these two diseases with long-term effects. This position paper from the PERT Consortium specifically addresses issues related to the diagnosis and management of PE in patients with COVID-19.

The right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) velocity time integral (VTI), an echocardiographic measure of stroke distance, correlates with cardiac index. We sought to determine the prognostic significance of low RVOT VTI on clinical outcomes among patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE).We conducted a retrospective review of echocardiograms on Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (PERT) activations at our institution. The main outcome was a composite of death, cardiac arrest, or hemodynamic deterioration.Of 188 patients, 30 met the combined outcome (16%) and had significantly lower RVOT VTI measurements (9.0 cm v 13.4 cm, p 0.0001). The AUC for RVOT VTI at a cutoff of 10 cm was 0.78 (95% CI 0.67-0.90) with a sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive predictive value of 0.72, 0.81, 0.94, and 0.42, respectively. Fifty-two patients of the cohort were classified as intermediate-high-risk PE and 21% of those met the combined outcome. RVOT VTI was lower among outcome positive patients (7.3 cm v 10.7 cm, p = 0.02).Low RVOT VTI is associated with poor clinical outcomes among patients with acute PE.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with increased rates of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). Pulmonary Embolism Response Teams (PERT) have previously been associated with improved outcomes. We aimed to investigate whether PERT utilization, recommendations, and outcomes for patients diagnosed with acute PE changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is a retrospective cohort study of all adult patients with acute PE who received care at an academic hospital system in New York City between March 1st and April 30th, 2020. These patients were compared against historic controls between March 1st and April 30th, 2019. PE severity, PERT utilization, initial management, PERT recommendations, and outcomes were compared. There were more cases of PE during the pandemic (82 vs. 59), but less PERT activations (26.8% vs. 64.4%, p

Background Pulmonary embolism response teams (PERTs) have become increasingly popular at institutions around the country, although the evidence to support their efficacy is limited. PERTs are mechanisms for rapid involvement of a multidisciplinary team in the management of a time-sensitive condition with many treatment options. Methods We retrospectively reviewed 201 patients with PERT activations since inception, collecting data on demographics, time to treatment, treatment modality, and in-hospital outcomes. Results Massive pulmonary embolism accounted for 16 (8.7%) PERT activations. The majority of patients were treated without invasive intervention; 91.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87.1%-95.7%) of patients received anticoagulation alone, 4.5% (95% CI, 0%-18.6%) had catheter-directed therapy (CDT), and 3.0% (95% CI, 0%-16.9%) had systemic administration of tissue plasminogen activator (tPA). The average time to intervention was 665 minutes (95% CI, 249-1080 minutes) for CDT and 22 minutes (95% CI, 0-456 minutes) for systemic TPA. The average time to anticoagulation was 2.3 minutes (95% CI, 0-43 minutes). There was a trend toward higher rates of cardiac events (odds ratio [OR], 12.68; 95% CI, 0.62-65.74) and death (OR, 3.19; 95% CI, 0.28-5.18) among patients with massive PE. There was a higher rate of cardiac events (OR, 5.66; 95% CI, 1.34-23.83) among patients who received tPA or an invasive intervention. There was no difference in mortality rates of patients who underwent aggressive management compared with anticoagulation alone. Conclusions A dedicated PERT results in efficient delivery of care and excellent outcomes, in part owing to the rapid (on average, 8 minutes) time to initiation of a multidisciplinary discussion. Patients who ultimately underwent CDT had an interval of >10 hours on average between diagnosis and CDT. This provisional or delayed approach to CDT in selected patients who were not improving with anticoagulation alone (and therefore had potential for higher net benefit from a procedure with its own inherent risks) may have resulted in a lower rate of CDT.

Objectives The rate of thromboembolic events among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 is high; however, there is no robust method to identify those at greatest risk. We reviewed thromboelastography studies in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 to characterize their coagulation states. Design Retrospective. Setting Tertiary ICU in New York City. Patients Sixty-four patients with coronavirus disease 2019 admitted to the ICU with thromboelastography performed. Interventions None. Measurements and main results Fifty percent of patients had a clotting index in the hypercoagulable range (clotting index > 3) (median 3.05). Reaction time and K values were below the lower limit of normal in 43.8% of the population consistent with a hypercoagulable profile. The median α angle and maximum amplitude (75.8° and 72.8 mm, respectively) were in the hypercoagulable range. The α angle was above reference range in 70.3% of patients indicative of rapid clot formation. Maximum amplitude, a factor of fibrinogen and platelet count and function, and a measure of clot strength was above reference range in 60.1% of patients. Thirty-one percent had thromboembolic events; thromboelastography parameters did not correlate with events in our cohort. Those with D-dimer values greater than 2,000 were more likely to have shorter reaction times compared with those with D-dimer levels less than or equal to 2,000 (4.8 vs 5.6 min; p = 0.001). Conclusions A large proportion of critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 have hypercoagulable thromboelastography profiles with additional derangements related to fibrinogen and platelet function. As the majority of patients have an elevated thromboelastography maximum amplitude, a follow-up study evaluating platelet aggregation would be instructive.

Over a third of patients surviving acute pulmonary embolism (PE) will experience long-term cardiopulmonary limitations. Persistent thrombi, impaired gas exchange, and altered hemodynamics account for aspects of the postpulmonary embolism syndrome that spans mild functional limitations to debilitating chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH), the most worrisome long-term consequence. Though pulmonary endarterectomy is potentially curative for the latter, less is understood surrounding chronic thromboembolic disease (CTED) and post-PE dyspnea. Advances in pulmonary vasodilator therapies and growing expertise in balloon pulmonary angioplasty provide options for a large group of patients ineligible for surgery, or those with persistent postoperative pulmonary hypertension. In this clinical review, we discuss epidemiology and pathophysiology as well as advances in diagnostics and therapeutics surrounding the spectrum of disease that may follow months after acute PE.

We evaluated the incidence of thrombosis in patients hospitalized with non-COVID-19 acute viral respiratory illnesses nationwide from 2012 to 2014 and compared this to the incidence among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 at a large health system in New York. Non-COVID-19 viral respiratory illness was complicated by acute MI in 2.8% of hospitalizations, VTE in 1.6%, ischemic stroke in 0.7%, and other systemic embolism in 0.1%. The proportion of hospitalizations complicated by thrombosis was lower in patients with viral respiratory illness in 2002-2014 than in COVID-19 (5% vs 16%; P< .001). Background Thrombosis is a prominent feature of the novel Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The incidence of thrombosis during hospitalization for non-COVID-19 viral respiratory infections is uncertain. We evaluated the incidence of thrombosis in patients hospitalized with non-COVID-19 acute viral respiratory illnesses compared to COVID-19. Methods Adults age >18 years hospitalized with a non-COVID-19 viral respiratory illness between 2002 and 2014 were identified. The primary study outcome was a composite of venous and arterial thrombotic events, including myocardial infarction (MI), acute ischemic stroke, and venous thromboembolism (VTE), as defined by ICD-9 codes. The incidence of thrombosis in non-COVID-19 viral respiratory illnesses was compared to the recently published incidence of thrombosis in COVID-19 from 3,334 patients hospitalized in New York in 2020. Results Among 954,521 hospitalizations with viral pneumonia from 2002 to 2014 (mean age 62.3 years, 57.1% female), the combined incidence of arterial and venous thrombosis was 5.0%. Acute MI occurred in 2.8% of hospitalizations, VTE in 1.6%, ischemic stroke in 0.7%, and other systemic embolism in 0.1%. Patients with thrombosis had higher in-hospital mortality (14.9% vs 3.3%, P< .001) than those without thrombosis. The proportion of hospitalizations complicated by thrombosis was lower in patients with viral respiratory illness in 2002-2014 than in COVID-19 (median age 64; 39.6% female) in 2020 (5% vs 16%; P< .001) Conclusion In a nationwide analysis of hospitalizations for viral pneumonias, thrombosis risk was lower than that observed in patients with COVID-19. Investigations into mechanisms of thrombosis and risk reduction strategies in COVID-19 and other viral respiratory infections are necessary., Graphical abstract Image, graphical abstract

The left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) velocity time integral (VTI) is an easily measured echocardiographic stroke volume index analog. Low values predict adverse outcomes in left ventricular failure. We postulate the left ventricular VTI may be a signal of right ventricular dysfunction in acute pulmonary embolism, and therefore a predictor of poor outcomes. We retrospectively reviewed echocardiograms on all Pulmonary Embolism Response Team activations at our institution at the time of pulmonary embolism diagnosis. Low LVOT VTI was defined as ⩽ 15 cm. We examined two composite outcomes: (1) in-hospital death or cardiac arrest; and (2) shock or need for primary reperfusion therapies. Sixty-one of 188 patients (32%) had a LVOT VTI of ⩽ 15 cm. Low VTI was associated with in-hospital death or cardiac arrest (odds ratio (OR) 6, 95% CI 2, 17.9; p = 0.0014) and shock or need for reperfusion (OR 23.3, 95% CI 6.6, 82.1; p < 0.0001). In a multivariable model, LVOT VTI ⩽ 15 remained significant for death or cardiac arrest (OR 3.48, 95% CI 1.02, 11.9; p = 0.047) and for shock or need for reperfusion (OR 8.12, 95% CI 1.62, 40.66; p = 0.011). Among intermediate–high-risk patients, low VTI was the only variable associated with the composite outcome of death, cardiac arrest, shock, or need for reperfusion (OR 14, 95% CI 1.7, 118.4; p = 0.015). LVOT VTI is associated with adverse short-term outcomes in acute pulmonary embolism. The VTI may help risk stratify patients with intermediate–high-risk pulmonary embolism.

Single-center studies suggest that implementation of multidisciplinary cardiogenic shock (CS) teams is associated with improved CS survival.The aim was to characterize practice patterns and outcomes in the management of CS across multiple centers with versus without shock teams.The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network is a multicenter network of cardiac intensive care units (CICUs) in North America. All consecutive medical admissions to each CICU (n = 24) were captured during annual 2-month collection periods (2017-2019; n = 6,872). Shock management and CICU mortality among centers with versus without shock teams were compared using inverse probability weighting.Ten of the 24 centers had shock teams. Among 1,242 CS admissions, 44% were at shock team centers. The groups were well-balanced with respect to demographics, shock etiology, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, biochemical markers of end organ dysfunction, and invasive hemodynamics. Centers with shock teams used more pulmonary artery catheters (60% vs 49%; adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 1.86; 95% CI: 1.47-2.35; P 0.001), less overall mechanical circulatory support (MCS) (35% vs 43%; adjusted OR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.59-0.95; P = 0.016), and more advanced types of MCS (53% vs 43% of all MCS; adjusted OR: 1.73; 95% CI: 1.19-2.51; P = 0.005) rather than intra-aortic balloon pumps. The presence of a shock team was independently associated with lower CICU mortality (23% vs 29%; adjusted OR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.55-0.94; P = 0.016).In this multicenter observational study, centers with shock teams were more likely to obtain invasive hemodynamics, use advanced types of MCS, and have lower risk-adjusted mortality. A standardized multidisciplinary shock team approach may improve outcomes in CS.

Objectives Venous thromboembolism, including deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, is a major source of morbidity, mortality, and healthcare utilization. Given the prevalence of venous thromboembolism and its associated mortality, our study sought to identify factors associated with loss to follow-up in venous thromboembolism patients. Methods This is a single-center retrospective study of all consecutive admitted (inpatient) and emergency department patients diagnosed with acute venous thromboembolism via venous duplex examination and/or chest computed tomography from January 2018 to March 2019. Patients with chronic deep venous thrombosis and those diagnosed in the outpatient setting were excluded. Lost to venous thromboembolism-specific follow-up (LTFU) was defined as patients who did not follow up with vascular, cardiology, hematology, oncology, pulmonology, or primary care clinic for venous thromboembolism management at our institution within three months of initial discharge. Patients discharged to hospice or dead within 30 days of initial discharge were excluded from LTFU analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA 16 (College Station, TX: StataCorp LLC) with a p-value of Results During the study period, 291 isolated deep venous thrombosis, 25 isolated pulmonary embolism, and 54 pulmonary embolism with associated deep venous thrombosis were identified in 370 patients. Of these patients, 129 (35%) were diagnosed in the emergency department and 241 (65%) in the inpatient setting. At discharge, 289 (78%) were on anticoagulation, 66 (18%) were not, and 15 (4%) were deceased. At the conclusion of the study, 120 patients (38%) had been LTFU, 85% of whom were discharged on anticoagulation. There was no statistically significant difference between those LTFU and those with follow-up with respect to age, gender, diagnosis time of day, venous thromboembolism anatomic location, discharge unit location, or anticoagulation choice at discharge. There was a non-significant trend toward longer inpatient length of stay among patients LTFU (16.2 days vs. 12.3 days, p = 0.07), and a significant increase in the proportion of LTFU patients discharged to a facility rather than home ( p = 0.02). On multivariate analysis, we found a 95% increase in the odds of being lost to venous thromboembolism-specific follow-up if discharged to a facility (OR 1.95, CI 1.1–3.6, p = 0.03) as opposed to home. Conclusions Our study demonstrates that over one-third of patients diagnosed with venous thromboembolism at our institution are lost to venous thromboembolism-specific follow-up, particularly those discharged to a facility. Our work suggests that significant improvement could be achieved by establishing a pathway for the targeted transition of care to a venous thromboembolism-specific follow-up clinic.

Purpose The coronavirus disease‐2019 (COVID‐19) led to a large influx of critically ill patients and altered echocardiography laboratory workflow. We developed a point‐of‐care ultrasound (POCUS) first approach to patients requiring echocardiography and describe our workflow and findings. Methods We performed a single‐center retrospective analysis of all POCUS studies performed on critically ill patients with COVID‐19. Sonography was performed by intensivists, uploaded and archived, and rapidly reviewed by echocardiographers. We evaluated each study based on the number of views obtained. Additionally, we provide a description of the workflow during the COVID‐19 surge at a tertiary care hospital in New York City. Results Fifty patients had POCUS studies performed by intensivists and reviewed by echocardiographers obviating the need for sonographer‐performed studies. Of the 48 cardiac POCUS studies, 17% of patients had 4 of 4 standard views available while 53% had 3 of 4 standard views. The parasternal long‐axis view was obtained on 81%, subxiphoid view on 79%, apical 4‐chamber view on 71%, and parasternal short‐axis view on 63% of patients. Conclusions Our POCUS workflow allowed intensivists to perform cardiac sonography for rapid bedside diagnosis of pathology with immediate interpretation performed by echocardiographers. At least 3 views were obtained in the majority of cases.

Purpose The COVID-19 surge required the deployment of large numbers of non-intensive care providers to assist in the management of the critically ill. Institutions took a variety of approaches to “uptraining” such providers though studies describing methods and effectiveness are lacking. Materials and methods One hundred and seventy-five providers underwent a 3 h simulation-based session focused on management of shock, mechanical ventilation, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and critical care ultrasound. All participants were sent surveys to assess their comfort with various aspects of critical care following return to their usual work environments. Results One hundred and eight providers of 175 (62%) completed the survey. Overall, 104/108 responders (96%) felt training either significantly or somewhat improved their knowledge in the management of ICU patients. Responders felt most comfortable in the management of hypoxemia in intubated patients and the management of ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (93% strongly agree or agree, and 86% strongly agree or agree, respectively). Fewer responders felt more comfortable using focused echocardiography (70% strongly agree or agree) and lung ultrasonography in following progression of COVID-19 (76% strongly agree or agree). Conclusions Simulation-based training improved provider comfort in the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19., Highlights • Non-intensivist providers underwent simulation-based training to work in the COVID-19 ICU. • Simulation-based training improved comfort in management of critically ill patients. • Comfort in management of intubated patients was greatly improved.

Background: Thrombosis is a major concern in respiratory infections such as influenza and now COVID-19. We investigated the magnitude and duration of risk for arterial and venous thrombosis following discharge after respiratory infections. Methods: Patients with respiratory infections were identified using the United States Nationwide Readmission Database from 2012-2014. Patients admitted with asthma or cellulitis served as comparators. Readmissions for myocardial infarction (MI) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) were evaluated at 30 to 180 days. The likelihood of a thrombotic event after hospital discharge was compared with a 30-day period prior to hospitalization using conditional logistic regression. Results: Among 5,271,068 patients discharged after a respiratory infection, 0.56% and 0.78% were readmitted within 30-days with MI and VTE, respectively. Relative to asthma and cellulitis, respiratory infection was associated with a greater age and sex-adjusted hazard of 30-day readmission for MI (adjusted HR [aHR] 1.58 [95% CI 1.52-1.64] vs. asthma; aHR 1.43 [95% CI 1.38-1.48] vs. cellulitis) and VTE (aHR 1.65 [95% CI 1.60-1.69] vs. asthma; aHR 1.45, [95% CI 1.41-1.50] vs. cellulitis). Risks of MI and VTE after respiratory infection attenuated over time, yet remained higher than asthma and cellulitis over 90 and 180 days (Figure). In a crossover-cohort analysis, the odds of MI (OR 1.68 [95% CI 1.62-1.73]) and VTE (OR 3.30 [95% 3.19-3.41]) were higher in the 30 days following discharge after respiratory infection than during the baseline period. The odds of MI (OR 2.44 [95% CI 1.95-3.05]) and VTE (OR 4.49 [95% 3.50-5.76]) at 30-days appeared highest when a viral respiratory pathogen was identified. Conclusions: Hospitalization for respiratory infection, particularly when of viral etiology, was associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction and venous thrombosis that was highest in the first 30-days after discharge and declined over time.

Introduction: In the United States, the chance of dying in the hospital widely varies by hospital, with bottom-decile hospitals having twice the rates of risk-adjusted mortality when compared to top-decile hospitals. This suggests a need for improvement in health systems nationwide. Here, we describe the implementation of, and associated outcomes for a multi-faceted, evidence-based approach to reducing in-hospital mortality. Methods: This is a retrospective interrupted time-series conducted at a large, urban, academic health system. Specifically, we describe the implementation of the following evidence-based methods: 1) escalation of communication guidelines, 2) proactive rounding with nurse response teams, and 3) rapid response teams with dedicated staff. We then quantify the associated observed-to-expected (O:E) in-hospital mortality over a 12-year period at our main hospital, and subsequently over a 3-year period at an affiliated hospital where the same interventions were later implemented. Results: Over 12 years, 445,308 patients were discharged from our main hospital, with 3,948 (0.9%) being discharged to an acute care facility, 4,558 (1.0%) discharged to hospice, and 4,648 (1.0%) expiring in the hospital. Patients had an average age of 53.1 years (std.dev 22.8 years), with the majority being female (59.0%), non-Hispanic white (66.1%), and admitted from the outpatient setting (93.3%). From the years 2010 to 2013, there was decline in O:E mortality by 59.0% (Figure 1A). This effect was sustained from 2014-2018. At the affiliate hospital, there was a similar decline in O:E mortality after implementation of the same interventions (60.5%, Figure 1B). Conclusion: Our multi-faceted, programmatic approach was associated with over 50% reductions in in-hospital mortality that were sustained for several years after implementation, and were reproduced at an affiliated hospital.

Aims: To define outcomes of patients with COVID-19 compared to patients without COVID-19 suffering in-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA). Materials and methods: We performed a single-center retrospective study of IHCA cases. Patients with COVID-19 were compared to consecutive patients without COVID-19 from the prior year. Return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), 30-day survival, and cerebral performance category (CPC) at 30-days were assessed. Results: Fifty-five patients with COVID-19 suffering IHCA were identified and compared to 55 consecutive IHCA patients in 2019. The COVID-19 cohort was more likely to require vasoactive agents (67.3% v 32.7%, p = 0.001), invasive mechanical ventilation (76.4% v 23.6%, p

The COVID-19 pandemic has placed an extraordinary strain on healthcare systems across North America. Defining the optimal approach for managing a critically ill COVID-19 patient is rapidly changing. Goal-directed transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is frequently used by physicians caring for intubated critically-ill patients as a reliable imaging modality that is well-suited to answer questions at bedside. A multi-disciplinary group of experts in point-of-care echocardiography and TEE representing intensive care, critical care cardiology and emergency medicine from the United States and Canada, convened to review the available evidence, share experiences, and produce a consensus statement aimed to provide clinicians with a framework to maximize the safety of patients and healthcare providers when considering TEE in critically ill patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. While transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) can provide the information needed in most patients, there are specific scenarios in which TEE represents the modality of choice. Among other critical care applications, TEE can allow hemodynamic assessment of patients during prone ventilation, perform serial evaluations of the lungs during recruitment maneuvers, guide cardiac arrest resuscitation, and facilitate veno-venous extra corporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) cannulation. To aid other clinicians in performing TEE during the COVID-19 pandemic, we describe a set of principles and practical aspects for performing examinations with a focus on the logistics, personnel, equipment required before, during, and after an examination. In the right clinical scenario, TEE is a tool that can provide the information needed to deliver the best and safest possible care for the critically ill patient., Highlights • Diagnostic procedures and tools that promote efficiency and accuracy in care should be appropriately utilized during the COVID-19 pandemic. • TEE offers those caring for intubated critically-ill patients a high-quality imaging modality capable of answering goal-directed questions that can impact decision making at the bedside. • TEE can be useful during the pandemic when adequate TTE windows cannot be obtained, when there is need to address hemodynamic instability during prone ventilation, to perform serial evaluations of the lungs, during cardiac arrest resuscitation and to guide veno-venous ECMO cannulation. • Despite plausibility as an aerosol generating procedure, based on the available evidence and experience in the frontlines our group of interdisciplinary experts from across North America support the use of TEE as an invaluable tool for managing the critically ill patient with COVID-19.

This study sought to prospectively evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Indigo aspiration system in submassive acute pulmonary embolism (PE).PE treatment with thrombolytics has bleeding risks. Aspiration thrombectomy can remove thrombus without thrombolytics, but data are lacking.This study was a prospective, single-arm, multicenter study that enrolled patients with symptomatic acute PE ≤14 days, systolic blood pressure ≥90 mm Hg, and right ventricular-to-left ventricular (RV/LV) ratio0.9. The primary efficacy endpoint was change in RV/LV ratio from baseline to 48 h post-procedure on core lab-adjudicated computed tomography angiography. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of 48-h major adverse events: device-related death, major bleeding, and device-related serious adverse events (clinical deterioration, pulmonary vascular, or cardiac injury). All sites received Institutional Review Board approval.A total of 119 patients (mean age 59.8 ± 15.0 years) were enrolled at 22 U.S. sites between November 2017 and March 2019. Median device insertion to removal time was 37.0 (interquartile range: 23.5 to 60.0) min. Two (1.7%) patients received intraprocedural thrombolytics. Mean RV/LV ratio reduction from baseline to 48 h post-procedure was 0.43 (95% confidence interval: 0.38 to 0.47; p 0.0001). Two (1.7%) patients experienced 3 major adverse events. Rates of cardiac injury, pulmonary vascular injury, clinical deterioration, major bleeding, and device-related death at 48 h were 0%, 1.7%, 1.7%, 1.7%, and 0.8%, respectively.In this prospective, multicenter study the Indigo aspiration system was associated with a significant reduction in the RV/LV ratio and a low major adverse event rate in submassive PE patients. Intraprocedural thrombolytic drugs were avoided in 98.3% of patients. (Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of the Indigo aspiration system in Acute Pulmonary Embolism [EXTRACT-PE]; NCT03218566).

Highlights • The risk of thromboembolic events in COVID-19 is substantial • Pulmonary embolism should be considered in cases of clinical deterioration • Management of clot in transit is controversial

Emergency airway management is often complicated by the presence of blood, emesis or other contaminants in the airway. Traditional airway management education has lacked task-specific training focused on mitigating massive airway contamination. The Suction Assisted Laryngoscopy and Airway Decontamination (SALAD) technique was developed in order to address the problem of massive airway contamination both in simulation training and in vivo. We review the evidence describing the dangers associated with airway contamination, and describe the SALAD technique in detail.

Pulmonary Embolism Response Teams (PERTs) have emerged to provide rapid multidisciplinary assessment and treatment of PE patients. However, descriptive institutional experience and preliminary outcomes data from such teams are sparse. PERT activations were identified through a retrospective review. Only confirmed submassive or massive PEs were included in the data analysis. In addition to baseline variables, the therapeutic intervention, length of stay (LOS), in-hospital mortality, and bleeding rate/severity were recorded. A total of 124 PERT activations occurred over 20 months: 43 in the first 10 months and 81 in the next 10. A total of 87 submassive (90.8%) and massive (9.2%) PE patients were included. The median age was 65 (51–75 IQR) years. Catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) was administered to 25 patients, systemic thrombolysis (ST) to six, and anticoagulation alone (AC) to 54. The median ICU stay and overall LOS were 6 (3–10 IQR) and 7 (4–14 IQR) days, respectively, with no association with any variables except a brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) >100 pg/mL ( p=0.008 ICU LOS; p=0.047 overall LOS). Twelve patients (13.7%) died in the hospital, nine of whom had metastatic or brain cancer, with a median overall LOS of 13 (11–17 IQR) days. There were five major bleeds: one in the CDT group, one in the ST group, and three in the AC group. Overall, (1) PERT activations increased after the first 10 months; (2) BNP >100 pg/mL was associated with a longer LOS; (3) rates of mortality and bleeding did not correlate with treatment; and (4) the majority of in-hospital deaths occurred in patients with advanced cancer.

Management of high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) requires an understanding of the pathophysiology of PE, options for rapid clot reduction, critical care interventions, and advanced cardiopulmonary support. PE can lead to rapid respiratory and hemodynamic collapse via a complex sequence of events leading to acute right ventricular failure. Importantly, reduction in pulmonary vascular resistance must be accomplished either by systemic thrombolytics, catheter directed thrombolytics, endovascular clot extraction, or surgical embolectomy. There are important advances in these techniques all of which have a niche role in the cardiopulmonary stabilization of critically ill patient with PE. Critical care support surrounding the above interventions is necessary. Maintenance of systemic perfusion and cardiac output may require careful titration of vasopressors, inotropes, and preload. Extreme caution should be taken with approach to intubation and positive pressure ventilation. A hemodynamically neutral induction with preparations for circulatory collapse should be the goal. Once intubated, the effect of positive pressure on pulmonary vascular resistance and right ventricular hemodynamics is necessary. Veno-arterial extra corporeal membrane oxygenation plays an increasingly important role in the stabilization of the hemodynamically collapsed patient who either has a contraindication to systemic lytics, failed systemic lytics, or requires a bridge to surgical or catheter embolectomy. Veno-arterial extra corporeal membrane oxygenation has also been used alone to stabilize the circulation until hemodynamics normalize on anticoagulation and has also been used in tenuous patient as a safety net for endovascular procedures.

Background: Temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices provide hemodynamic assistance for shock refractory to pharmacological treatment. Most registries have focused on single devices or specific etiologies of shock, limiting data regarding overall practice patterns with temporary MCS in cardiac intensive care units. Methods: The CCCTN (Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network) is a multicenter network of tertiary CICUs in North America. Between September 2017 and September 2018, each center (n=16) contributed a 2-month snapshot of consecutive medical CICU admissions. Results: Of the 270 admissions using temporary MCS, 33% had acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (CS), 31% had CS not related to acute myocardial infarction, 11% had mixed shock, and 22% had an indication other than shock. Among all 585 admissions with CS or mixed shock, 34% used temporary MCS during the CICU stay with substantial variation between centers (range: 17%–50%). The most common temporary MCS devices were intraaortic balloon pumps (72%), Impella (17%), and veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (11%), although intraaortic balloon pump use also varied between centers (range: 40%–100%). Patients managed with intraaortic balloon pump versus other forms of MCS (advanced MCS) had lower Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores and less severe metabolic derangements. Illness severity was similar at high- versus low-MCS utilizing centers and at centers with more advanced MCS use. Conclusions: There is wide variation in the use of temporary MCS among patients with shock in tertiary CICUs. While hospital-level variation in temporary MCS device selection is not explained by differences in illness severity, patient-level variation appears to be related, at least in part, to illness severity.