Invasive Endotyping in Patients With Angina and No Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the usefulness of invasive coronary function testing to diagnose the cause of angina in patients with no obstructive coronary arteries. METHODS: Outpatients referred for coronary computed tomography angiography in 3 hospitals in the United Kingdom were prospectively screened. After coronary computed tomography angiography, patients with unobstructed coronary arteries, and who consented, underwent invasive endotyping. The diagnostic assessments included coronary angiography, fractional flow reserve (patient excluded if ≤0.80), and, for those without obstructive coronary artery disease, coronary flow reserve (abnormal <2.0), index of microvascular resistance (abnormal ≥25), and intracoronary infusion of acetylcholine (0.182, 1.82, and 18.2 µg/mL; 2 mL/min for 2 minutes) to assess for microvascular and coronary spasm. Participants were randomly assigned to disclosure of the results of the coronary function tests to the invasive cardiologist (intervention group) or nondisclosure (control group, blinded). In the control group, a diagnosis of vasomotor angina was based on medical history, noninvasive tests, and coronary angiography. The primary outcome was the between-group difference in the reclassification rate of the initial diagnosis on the basis of coronary computed tomography angiography versus the final diagnosis after invasive endotyping. The Seattle Angina Questionnaire summary score and Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Of 322 eligible patients, 250 (77.6%) underwent invasive endotyping; 19 (7.6%) had obstructive coronary disease, 127 (55.0%) had microvascular angina, 27 (11.7%) had vasospastic angina, 17 (7.4%) had both, and 60 (26.0%) had no abnormality. A total of 231 patients (mean age, 55.7 years; 64.5% women) were randomly assigned and followed up (median duration, 19.9 [12.6-26.9] months). The clinician diagnosed vasomotor angina in 51 (44.3%) patients in the intervention group and in 55 (47.4%) patients in the control group. After randomization, patients in the intervention group were 4-fold (odds ratio, 4.05 [95% CI, 2.32-7.24]; P<0.001) more likely to be diagnosed with a coronary vasomotor disorder; the frequency of this diagnosis increased to 76.5%. The frequency of normal coronary function (ie, no vasomotor disorder) was not different between the groups before randomization (51.3% versus 50.9%) but was reduced in the intervention group after randomization (23.5% versus 50.9%, P<0.001). At 6 and 12 months, the Seattle Angina Questionnaire summary score in the intervention versus control groups was 59.2±24.2 (2.3±16.2 change from baseline) versus 60.4±23.9 (4.6±16.4 change) and 63.7±23.5 (4.7±14.7 change) versus 66.0±19.3 (7.9±17.1 change), respectively, and not different between groups (global P=0.36). Compared with the control group, global treatment satisfaction was higher in the intervention group at 12 months (69.9±22.8 versus 61.7±26.9, P=0.013). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with angina and no obstructive coronary arteries, a diagnosis informed by invasive functional assessment had no effect on long-term angina burden, whereas treatment satisfaction improved. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03477890.

The coronary microvascular angina cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging trial: Rationale and design.

BACKGROUND: Coronary microvascular dysfunction may cause myocardial ischemia with no obstructive coronary artery disease (INOCA). If functional testing is not performed INOCA may pass undetected. Stress perfusion cardiovascular MRI (CMR) quantifies myocardial blood flow (MBF) but the clinical utility of stress CMR in the management of patients with suspected angina with no obstructive coronary arteries (ANOCA) is uncertain. OBJECTIVES: First, to undertake a diagnostic study using stress CMR in patients with ANOCA following invasive coronary angiography and, second, in a nested, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial to assess the effect of disclosure on the final diagnosis and health status in the longer term. DESIGN: All-comers referred for clinically indicated coronary angiography for the investigation of suspected coronary artery disease will be screened in 3 regional centers in the United Kingdom. Following invasive coronary angiography, patients with ANOCA who provide informed consent will undergo noninvasive endotyping using stress CMR within 3 months of the angiogram. DIAGNOSTIC STUDY: Stress perfusion CMR imaging to assess the prevalence of coronary microvascular dysfunction and clinically significant incidental findings in patients with ANOCA. The primary outcome is the between-group difference in the reclassification rate of the initial diagnosis based on invasive angiography versus the final diagnosis after CMR imaging. RANDOMIZED, CONTROLLED TRIAL: Participants will be randomized to inclusion (intervention group) or exclusion (control group) of myocardial blood flow to inform the final diagnosis. The primary outcome of the clinical trial is the mean within-subject change in the Seattle Angina Questionnaire summary score (SAQSS) at 6 months. Secondary outcome assessments include the EUROQOL EQ-5D-5L questionnaire, the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (Brief-IPQ), the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (TSQM-9), the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4), the Duke Activity Status Index (DASI), the International Physical Activity Questionnaire- Short Form (IPAQ-SF), the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) and the 8-item Productivity Cost Questionnaire (iPCQ). Health and economic outcomes will be assessed using electronic healthcare records. VALUE: To clarify if routine stress perfusion CMR imaging reclassifies the final diagnosis in patients with ANOCA and whether this strategy improves symptoms, health-related quality of life and health economic outcomes. CLINICALTRIALS: GOV: NCT04805814.

Definition and epidemiology of coronary microvascular disease.

Ischemic heart disease remains one of the leading causes of death and disability worldwide. However, most patients referred for a noninvasive computed tomography coronary angiogram (CTA) or invasive coronary angiogram for the investigation of angina do not have obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Approximately two in five referred patients have coronary microvascular disease (CMD) as a primary diagnosis and, in addition, CMD also associates with CAD and myocardial disease (dual pathology). CMD underpins excess morbidity, impaired quality of life, significant health resource utilization, and adverse cardiovascular events. However, CMD often passes undiagnosed and the onward management of these patients is uncertain and heterogeneous. International standardized diagnostic criteria allow for the accurate diagnosis of CMD, ensuring an often overlooked patient population can be diagnosed and stratified for targeted medical therapy. Key to this is assessing coronary microvascular function-including coronary flow reserve, coronary microvascular resistance, and coronary microvascular spasm. This can be done by invasive methods (intracoronary temperature-pressure wire, intracoronary Doppler flow-pressure wire, intracoronary provocation testing) and non-invasive methods [positron emission tomography (PET), cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR), transthoracic Doppler echocardiography (TTDE), cardiac computed tomography (CT)]. Coronary CTA is insensitive for CMD. Functional coronary angiography represents the combination of CAD imaging and invasive diagnostic procedures.

External validation of the COVID-19 4C mortality score in an urban United States cohort.

BACKGROUND: Identifying patients at risk for mortality from COVID-19 is crucial to triage, clinical decision-making, and the allocation of scarce hospital resources. The 4C Mortality Score effectively predicts COVID-19 mortality, but it has not been validated in a United States (U.S.) population. The purpose of this study is to determine whether the 4C Mortality Score accurately predicts COVID-19 mortality in an urban U.S. adult inpatient population. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included adult patients admitted to a single-center, tertiary care hospital (Philadelphia, PA) with a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR from 3/01/2020 to 6/06/2020. Variables were extracted through a combination of automated export and manual chart review. The outcome of interest was mortality during hospital admission or within 30 days of discharge. RESULTS: This study included 426 patients; mean age was 64.4 years, 43.4% were female, and 54.5% self-identified as Black or African American. All-cause mortality was observed in 71 patients (16.7%). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of the 4C Mortality Score was 0.85 (95% confidence interval, 0.79-0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians may use the 4C Mortality Score in an urban, majority Black, U.S. inpatient population. The derivation and validation cohorts were treated in the pre-vaccine era so the 4C Score may over-predict mortality in current patient populations. With stubbornly high inpatient mortality rates, however, the 4C Score remains one of the best tools available to date to inform thoughtful triage and treatment allocation.

Comparing reliability of ICD-10-based COVID-19 comorbidity data to manual chart review, a retrospective cross-sectional study.

International Statistical Classification of Disease and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision codes (ICD-10) are used to characterize cohort comorbidities. Recent literature does not demonstrate standardized extraction methods. OBJECTIVE: Compare COVID-19 cohort manual-chart-review and ICD-10-based comorbidity data; characterize the accuracy of different methods of extracting ICD-10-code-based comorbidity, including the temporal accuracy with respect to critical time points such as day of admission. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. MEASUREMENTS: ICD-10-based-data performance characteristics relative to manual-chart-review. RESULTS: Discharge billing diagnoses had a sensitivity of 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79-0.85; comorbidity range: 0.35-0.96). The past medical history table had a sensitivity of 0.72 (95% CI: 0.69-0.76; range: 0.44-0.87). The active problem list had a sensitivity of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.63-0.71; range: 0.47-0.71). On day of admission, the active problem list had a sensitivity of 0.58 (95% CI: 0.54-0.63; range: 0.30-0.68)and past medical history table had a sensitivity of 0.48 (95% CI: 0.43-0.53; range: 0.30-0.56). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: ICD-10-based comorbidity data performance varies depending on comorbidity, data source, and time of retrieval; there are notable opportunities for improvement. Future researchers should clearly outline comorbidity data source and validate against manual-chart-review.

Association of race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status with COVID-19 30-day mortality at a Philadelphia medical center using a retrospective cohort study.

COVID-19 has disproportionately affected low-income communities and people of color. Previous studies demonstrated that race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status (SES) are not independently correlated with COVID-19 mortality. The purpose of our study is to determine the effect of race/ethnicity and SES on COVID-19 30-day mortality in a diverse, Philadelphian population. This is a retrospective cohort study in a single-center tertiary care hospital in Philadelphia, PA. The study includes adult patients hospitalized with polymerase-chain-reaction-confirmed COVID-19 between March 1, 2020 and June 6, 2020. The primary outcome was a composite of COVID-19 death or hospice discharge within 30 days of discharge. The secondary outcome was intensive care unit (ICU) admission. The study included 426 patients: 16.7% died, 3.3% were discharged to hospice, and 20.0% were admitted to the ICU. Using multivariable analysis, race/ethnicity was not associated with the primary nor secondary outcome. In Model 4, age greater than 75 (odds ratio [OR]: 11.01; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.96-61.97) and renal disease (OR: 2.78; 95% CI: 1.31-5.90) were associated with higher odds of the composite primary outcome. Living in a "very-low-income area" (OR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.12-0.71) and body mass index (BMI) 30-35 (OR: 0.24; 95% CI: 0.08-0.69) were associated with lower odds of the primary outcome. When controlling for demographics, SES, and comorbidities, race/ethnicity was not independently associated with the composite primary outcome. Very-low SES, as extrapolated from census-tract-level income data, was associated with lower odds of the composite primary outcome.

Osseous Genioplasty: Prevention of Witch's Chin Deformity with No-Degloving Technique.

BACKGROUND: Osseous genioplasty is a powerful procedure that can correct chin dysmorphology; however, traditional techniques may result in chin ptosis or a "witch's chin" deformity. Iatrogenic chin ptosis is thought to be caused by excessive degloving of soft tissue with a failure to reattach the mentalis muscle. In the authors' study, they compared the "no-degloving" technique (using a 90-degree plate with lag-screw fixation) to the "traditional" technique, for minimization of chin ptosis. METHODS: The authors compared genioplasty techniques for consecutive patients: group 1 (traditional) underwent degloving for fixation of a stair-step plate, whereas group 2 (no-degloving) underwent lag-screw fixation (n = 50; 25 patients per group). The authors compared operating room time, advancement, complications, preoperative-to-postoperative vertical height change of the pogonion and menton (obtained through cone beam computed tomographic scans), surgeons' assessment of witch's chin, and FACE-Q surveys. RESULTS: No-degloving versus traditional groups had similar age and sex distributions, horizontal/vertical change (5 mm/2 mm versus 6 mm/2 mm), length of surgery, and complication rate (5 percent). The traditional group had more deviation from expected position for both the pogonion (3.4 mm versus 1.2 mm; p ≤ 0.05) and menton (2.9 mm versus 0.8 mm; p ≤ 0.05), and more occurrences of witch's chin (six versus zero). No-degloving was superior for several FACE-Q scales, including Chin Appearance, Quality of Life, Satisfaction with Decision to Undergo Procedure, and Satisfaction with Outcome. CONCLUSION: No-degloving osseous genioplasty is a safe, reproducible technique that results in decreased soft-tissue ptosis and increased patient satisfaction. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.