Utilizing synchronous care to improve cardiovascular and renal health among patients with type 2 diabetes: Proof-of-concept results from the DECIDE-CV clinical programme.

AIM: The management of patients with type 2 diabetes is asynchronous, i.e. not coordinated in time, resulting in delayed access to care and low use of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT). METHODS: We retrospectively analysed consecutive patients assessed in the 'synchronized' DECIDE-CV clinic. In this outpatient clinic, patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular or chronic kidney disease are simultaneously assessed by an endocrinologist, cardiologist and nephrologist in the same visit. The primary outcome was use of GDMT before and after the assessment in the clinic, including sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists, renin-angiotensin system blockers and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. Secondary outcomes included the baseline-to-last-visit change in surrogate laboratory biomarkers. RESULTS: The first 232 patients evaluated in the clinic were included. The mean age was 67 ± 12 years, 69% were men and 92% had diabetes. In total, 73% of patients had atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, 65% heart failure, 56% chronic kidney disease and 59% had a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio ≥30 mg/g. There was a significant increase in the use of GDMT:sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (from 44% to 87% of patients), glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (from 8% to 45%), renin-angiotensin system blockers (from 77% to 91%) and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (from 25% to 45%) (p < .01 for all). Among patients with paired laboratory data, glycated haemoglobin, urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio and N-terminal proB-type natriuretic peptide levels significantly dropped from baseline (p < .05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Joint assessment of patients with diabetes in a synchronized cardiometabolic clinic holds promise for enhancing GDMT use and has led to significant reductions in surrogate cardiovascular and renal laboratory biomarkers.

Incidence, predictors, and clinical outcomes of permanent pacemaker insertion following transcatheter aortic valve implantation in an Arab population.

PURPOSE: Conduction defects requiring permanent pacemaker insertion (PPI) are one of the most common complications after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The purpose of this study was to identify the incidence and predictors of this complication as well as to assess clinical outcomes of patients requiring PPI after TAVI in an Arab population. METHODS: In this single-center, retrospective cohort analysis, all patients who underwent TAVI from 2010 to 2018 were reviewed; seventy-four independent variables were collected per patient, and multivariate analysis was performed to identify predictors. In-hospital outcomes were examined as well as 30-day and 1-year endpoints as defined by the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2. RESULTS: There were 48 of 170 patients (28.2%) who required PPI within 30 days of TAVI. The median time from TAVI to PPI was 2 days (interquartile range: 0 to 5 days). Positive predictors of 30-day PPI were prior right bundle branch block (odds ratio [OR]: 4.10; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.37 to 0.79; p < 0.001), post-procedural development of new right bundle branch block (OR: 3.59; 95% CI: 1.07 to 12.03; p = 0.038), post-procedural development of new left bundle branch block (LBBB) (OR: 1.85; 95% CI: 1.21 to 2.84; p = 0.005), post-procedural prolongation of PR interval (OR: 1.02; 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.02; p < 0.001), and post-procedural QRS duration (OR: 1.01; 95% CI: 1.00 to 1.03; p = 0.02). However, post-procedural development of new LBBB no longer remained a significant predictor of PPI after excluding six patients with LBBB who underwent prophylactic PPI (p = 0.093). Negative predictors of 30-day PPI were the presence of diabetes (OR: 0.54; 95% CI: 037 to 0.79; p = 0.001), the use of prosthesis size 29 compared to 23 (OR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.35 to 0.87; p = 0.010), and the use of prosthesis size 26 compared to 23 (OR: 0.31; 95% CI: 0.20 to 0.50; p < 0.001). PPI was associated with longer median hospital stay, but the result was borderline significant after multivariate adjustment (19 vs. 14 days; p = 0.052). There was no statistically significant difference in 30-day and 1-year clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: One-third of patients required PPI after TAVI. Several risk factors can identify patients at risk for PPI particularly pre-existing right bundle branch block. Further studies are needed to assess the association between PPI and negative clinical outcomes.