The Cardiovascular Quality Improvement and Care Innovation Consortium: Inception of a Multicenter Collaborative to Improve Cardiovascular Care.

Despite decades of improvement in the quality and outcomes of cardiovascular care, significant gaps remain. Existing quality improvement strategies are often limited in scope to specific clinical conditions and episodic care. Health services and outcomes research is essential to inform gaps in care but rarely results in the development and implementation of care delivery solutions. Although individual health systems are engaged in projects to improve the quality of care delivery, these efforts often lack a robust study design or implementation evaluation that can inform generalizability and further dissemination. Aligning the work of health care systems and health services and outcomes researchers could serve as a strategy to overcome persisting gaps in cardiovascular quality and outcomes. We describe the inception of the Cardiovascular Quality Improvement and Care Innovation Consortium that seeks to rapidly improve cardiovascular care by (1) developing, implementing, and evaluating multicenter quality improvement projects using innovative care designs; (2) serving as a resource for quality improvement and care innovation partners; and (3) establishing a presence within existing quality improvement and care innovation structures. Success of the collaborative will be defined by projects that result in changes to care delivery with demonstrable impacts on the quality and outcomes of care across multiple health systems. Furthermore, insights gained from implementation of these projects across sites in Cardiovascular Quality Improvement and Care Innovation Consortium will inform and promote broad dissemination for greater impact.

One-year results of the ICON (Ionic versus non-ionic Contrast to Obviate worsening Nephropathy after angioplasty in chronic renal failure patients) Study.

BACKGROUND: Long-term clinical outcomes after exposure to non-ionic iso-osmolar contrast medium (IOCM) or ionic low-osmolar CM (LOCM) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) undergoing coronary angiography are unclear. METHODS: The ICON trial was a prospective, double-blinded, multicentre study that randomly assigned 146 patients with CKD undergoing coronary angiography with or without percutaneous coronary intervention to the non-ionic IOCM Iodixanol or the ionic LOCM Ioxaglate. We report the 1-year clinical outcomes. RESULTS: After randomization, baseline and procedural characteristics were well-matched between the two groups. At 1 year, three deaths (4.1%) occurred in the ioxaglate and nine deaths in the iodixanol group (13.6%, P = 0.07). The cardiac death rate at 1 year was 2.7% in the ioxaglate group and 9.1% in the iodixanol group (P = 0.07). There were no significant differences in the rates of myocardial infarction (1.4% vs. 1.5%; P = 1.00) and repeated revascularization (6.8% vs. 9.1%; P = 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: The use of ionic LOCM ioxaglate was associated with a numerically lower mortality at 1 year as compared to iodixanol in patients who underwent cardiac catheterization. Future studies evaluating long-term safety following exposure to different types of CM are warranted.

Achieving sustainable first door-to-balloon times of 90 minutes for regional transfer ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVES: A network approach to transfer ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients can achieve durable first door-to-balloon times (1st D2B) for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within 90 min. BACKGROUND: Nationally, a minority of STEMI patients from referral centers obtain 1st D2B in <2 h and even fewer in <90 min. METHODS: Included were transfer STEMI patients from 9 network hospitals treated in 2007 compared with 2008 to 2011 after installing the following initiatives: 1) established hospital referral system; 2) goal-oriented performance protocols; 3) expedited transport by ground or air; 4) first hospital activation of the PCI hospital catheterization laboratory; and 5) outreach coordinator and patient-level web-based feedback to the referring hospital. RESULTS: A total of 101 STEMI patients transported in 2007 were compared with 442 STEMI patients transferred after starting these initiatives for STEMI from 2008 to 2011, with the median door-in to door-out time decreased from 44 to 35 min (p < 0.0001), the median 1st D2B decreasing from 109.5 to 88.0 min (p < 0.0001), and the percentage under 90 min increased from 22.8% to 55.9% (p < 0.0001). Overall, throughout the study period (2007 to 2011), the transport times remained consistent (median 36.5 vs. 36.0 min, p = 0.98), whereas the PCI hospital D2B decreased from 20.0 to 16.0 min (p < 0.0001). Length of stay and in-hospital mortality remained low at 3.0 days and under 4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A system-wide network program can achieve sustained (over 4 years) 1st D2B times of <90 min.

Ionic low-osmolar versus nonionic iso-osmolar contrast media to obviate worsening nephropathy after angioplasty in chronic renal failure patients: the ICON (Ionic versus non-ionic Contrast to Obviate worsening Nephropathy after angioplasty in chronic renal failure patients) study.

OBJECTIVES: This randomized, prospective, double-blind, multicenter study compared nephrotoxicity of the nonionic iso-osmolar contrast media (CM) iodixanol versus the ionic low-osmolar CM ioxaglate in patients with chronic renal insufficiency undergoing coronary angiography. BACKGROUND: The properties of iodinated CM might contribute to the incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN). METHODS: Patients with renal impairment undergoing coronary angiography were randomly assigned to iodixanol (n = 72) or ioxaglate (n = 74). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were well-matched between the 2 groups. The predicted risk score for CIN was similar in the iodixanol and in the ioxaglate groups (11.9 +/- 4.1 vs. 11.8 +/- 4.1), as was the use of N-acetylcysteine (70% vs. 73%). The primary end point of the study, median peak increase of serum creatinine from day 0 through day 3 after angiography, did not differ between the iodixanol (0.09 mg/dl; interquartile range 0.00 to 0.30 mg/dl) and the ioxaglate (0.15 mg/dl; interquartile range 0.00 to 0.40 mg/dl; p = 0.07) groups. The percentages of patients with a peak increase of serum creatinine >or=0.5 mg/dl (15.9% in iodixanol vs. 18.2% in ioxaglate), >or=1.0 mg/dl (1.4% vs. 4.5%), and >or=25% or >or=0.5 mg/dl (15.9% vs. 24.2%, respectively) also did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk patients undergoing coronary angiographic procedures, use of the nonionic iso-osmolar CM iodixanol does not reduce renal deterioration in patients with renal impairment, compared with the ionic low-osmolar CM ioxaglate. Given that the study was underpowered to compare nephrotoxicity of the 2 groups under the active medical protection of CIN, a larger randomized study is warranted that will enroll patients with higher risks of CIN under a strict control of hydration regimens and adjunctive medications.

Pharmacodynamic assessment of platelet inhibition by prasugrel vs. clopidogrel in the TRITON-TIMI 38 trial.

AIMS: To examine the extent of platelet inhibition by prasugrel vs. clopidogrel in a TRITON-TIMI 38 substudy. METHODS AND RESULTS: TRITON-TIMI 38 randomized acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to prasugrel or standard dose clopidogrel. Selected sites prospectively enrolled TRITON-TIMI 38 patients to evaluate adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-attenuated phosphorylation of platelet vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP) (n = 125 patients) and, in a subset (n = 31 patients), ADP-stimulated platelet aggregation. VASP platelet reactivity index (PRI) was lower in prasugrel-treated patients than in clopidogrel-treated patients at 1-2 h post-PCI (>or=1 h after loading dose) (P < 0.001) and at 30 days (P < 0.001). Maximal platelet aggregation to 20 microM ADP was lower in prasugrel-treated patients than in clopidogrel-treated patients at 1-2 h (P = 0.004) and 30 days (P = 0.03). Results were similar with 5 microM ADP. Thienopyridine hyporesponsiveness, prespecified as VASP PRI >50%, was more frequent in clopidogrel-treated patients than in prasugrel-treated patients at 1-2 h (P < 0.001) and 30 days (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The TRITON-TIMI 38 platelet substudy shows that prasugrel results in greater inhibition of ADP-mediated platelet function in ACS patients than clopidogrel, supporting the hypothesis that greater platelet inhibition leads to a lower incidence of ischaemic events and more bleeding both early and late following PCI.

Intensive oral antiplatelet therapy for reduction of ischaemic events including stent thrombosis in patients with acute coronary syndromes treated with percutaneous coronary intervention and stenting in the TRITON-TIMI 38 trial: a subanalysis of a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Intracoronary stenting can improve procedural success and reduce restenosis compared with balloon angioplasty in patients with acute coronary syndromes, but can also increase the rate of thrombotic complications including stent thrombosis. The TRITON-TIMI 38 trial has shown that prasugrel-a novel, potent thienopyridine-can reduce ischaemic events compared with standard clopidogrel therapy. We assessed the rate, outcomes, and prevention of ischaemic events in patients treated with prasugrel or clopidogrel with stents in the TRITON-TIMI 38 study. METHODS: Patients with moderate-risk to high-risk acute coronary syndromes were included in our analysis if they had received at least one coronary stent at the time of the index procedure following randomisation in TRITON-TIMI 38, and were further subdivided by type of stent received. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1 to 1 fashion to receive a loading dose of study drug (prasugrel 60 mg or clopidogrel 300 mg) as soon as possible after randomisation, followed by daily maintenance therapy (prasugrel 10 mg or clopidogrel 75 mg). All patients were to receive aspirin therapy. Treatment was to be continued for a minimum of 6 months and a maximum of 15 months. Randomisation was not stratified by stents used or stent type. The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke. Stent thrombosis was assessed using Academic Research Consortium definitions, and analysis was by intention to treat. TRITON-TIMI 38 is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00097591. FINDINGS: 12,844 patients received at least one coronary stent; 5743 received only drug-eluting stents, and 6461 received only bare-metal stents. Prasugrel compared with clopidogrel reduced the primary endpoint (9.7 vs 11.9%, HR 0.81, p=0.0001) in the stented cohort, in patients with only drug-eluting stents (9.0 vs 11.1%, HR 0.82, p=0.019), and in patients with only bare-metal stents (10.0 vs 12.2%, HR 0.80, p=0.003). Stent thrombosis was associated with death or myocardial infarction in 89% (186/210) of patients. Stent thrombosis was reduced with prasugrel overall (1.13 vs 2.35%, HR 0.48, p<0.0001), in patients with drug-eluting stents only (0.84 vs 2.31%, HR 0.36, p<0.0001), and in those with bare-metal stents only (1.27 vs 2.41%, HR 0.52, p=0.0009). INTERPRETATION: Intensive antiplatelet therapy with prasugrel resulted in fewer ischaemic outcomes including stent thrombosis than with standard clopidogrel. These findings were statistically robust irrespective of stent type, and the data affirm the importance of intensive platelet inhibition in patients with intracoronary stents.

Comparison of late survival in patients with cardiogenic shock due to right ventricular infarction versus left ventricular pump failure following primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction.

This study compared late survival after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with cardiogenic shock due to right ventricular (RV) infarction versus left ventricular (LV) pump failure. Consecutive patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary PCI (n = 2,496) were prospectively enrolled in a registry from 1984 to 2004. Cardiogenic shock occurred before PCI in 189 patients (7.6%). Shock was attributed to predominant RV infarction when there was right coronary artery occlusion with preserved LV function and increased right atrial pressure. Patients with shock due to RV infarction (n = 30) versus LV pump failure (n = 136) had fewer previous infarctions (10% vs 29%, p = 0.03), less multivessel disease (20% vs 47%, p = 0.007), higher right atrial pressure (21 vs 16 mm, p = 0.003), and better LV ejection fraction (57% vs 32%, p <0.001). In-hospital mortality was lower with shock due to RV infarction (23% vs 50%, p = 0.01), and shock due to RV infarction was a significant independent predictor of late cardiac survival (hazard ratio 0.28, 95% confidence interval 0.13 to 0.62, p = 0.002). In conclusion, survival after primary PCI in patients with shock due to RV infarction is better than that in patients with shock due to LV pump failure. This is in contrast to most previous reports. Improved survival is likely related to lower risk profile and previously documented substantial recovery of RV function after primary PCI.

Door-to-balloon time with primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction impacts late cardiac mortality in high-risk patients and patients presenting early after the onset of symptoms.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of door-to-balloon time with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on late cardiac mortality. BACKGROUND: The impact of door-to-balloon time on outcomes is controversial, and the impact on late mortality has not been studied. METHODS: Consecutive patients (n = 2,322) treated with primary PCI from 1984 to 2003 were prospectively identified and followed up for a median of 83 months. RESULTS: Prolonged door-to-balloon times (0 to 1.4 h vs. 1.5 to 1.9 h vs. 2.0 to 2.9 h vs. > or =3.0 h) were associated with higher in-hospital mortality (4.9% vs. 6.1% vs. 8.0% vs. 12.2%, p < 0.0001) and late mortality (12.6% vs. 16.4% vs. 20.4% vs. 27.1% at 7 years, p < 0.0001) and were an independent predictor of late mortality by Cox regression (p = 0.0004). Prolonged door-to-balloon times (> or =2 h vs. <2 h) were associated with higher late mortality in high-risk patients (32.5% vs. 21.5%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22 to 1.90; p = 0.0002) but not in low-risk patients (10.8% vs. 9.2%; HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.64; p = 0.53) and in patients presenting early (< or =3 h) (24.7% vs. 15.0%; HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.24 to 1.90; p = 0.0001) but not late (>3 h) (21.1% vs. 18.5%; HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.45; p = 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: Delays in door-to-balloon time impact late survival in high-risk but not low-risk patients and in patients presenting early but not late after the onset of symptoms. These findings have implications for the triage of patients for primary PCI.

A blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of percutaneous laser myocardial revascularization to improve angina symptoms in patients with severe coronary disease.

OBJECTIVES: This study was a randomized, patient- and evaluator-blinded, placebo-controlled trial in patients treated using percutaneous myocardial laser revascularization. BACKGROUND: Previous studies using similar therapies have been confounded by placebo bias. METHODS: A total of 298 patients with severe angina were randomly assigned to receive low-dose or high-dose myocardial laser channels or no laser channels, blinded as a sham procedure. The primary end point was the change in exercise duration from baseline examination to six months. RESULTS: The incidence of 30-day death, stroke, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, or left ventricular perforation occurred in two patients in the placebo, eight patients in the low-dose, and four patients in the high-dose groups (p = 0.12); 30-day myocardial infarction incidence was higher in patients receiving either low-dose or high-dose laser (nine patients) compared with placebo (no patients, p = 0.03). At six months, there were no differences in the change in exercise duration between those receiving a sham (28.0 s, n = 100), low-dose laser (33.2 s, n = 98), or high-dose laser (28.0 s, n = 98, p = 0.94) procedure. There were also no differences in the proportion of patients improving to better than Canadian Cardiovascular Society class III angina symptoms at six months. The follow-up visual summed stress single-photon-emission computed tomography scores were not significantly different from baseline in any group and were no different between groups. The modest improvement in angina symptoms assessed by the Seattle Angina Questionnaire also was not statistically different among the arms. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with percutaneous myocardial laser revascularization provides no benefit beyond that of a similar sham procedure in patients blinded to their treatment status.

Relation between electrocardiographic ST-segment resolution and early and late outcomes after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction.

ST-segment resolution (STR) is a surrogate end point in reperfusion trials of acute myocardial infarction, but there are few data regarding the optimum methods of measurement, clinical predictors, and correlation with late cardiac mortality. Consecutive patients (n = 1,005) who had acute myocardial infarction and >/=2 mm ST-segment elevation controlled with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) constituted our study group. Follow-up was obtained in 97% of patients at a median of 6.2 years. STR measured as maximum ST-segment elevation after PCI provided better discrimination of late cardiac mortality than did STR measured as percent resolution. Complete STR (<1.0 mm ST-segment elevation after PCI) was achieved in only 42% of patients. Anterior infarction, Killip's class 3 to 4, and Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction flow grades <2 before PCI and <3 after PCI were strong independent predictors of partial or poor STR. STR (complete [<1.0 mm] vs partial [1.0 to 2.0 mm] vs poor [>2.0 mm]) correlated with in-hospital mortality (4.0% vs 6.7% vs 11.6%, p = 0.005), reinfarction (1.4% vs 3.4% vs 6.1%, p = 0.01), and late cardiac mortality (17% vs 25% vs 44%, p <0.0001). Correlation with late mortality was stronger for nonanterior than for anterior infarction. Poor STR was a strong independent predictor of late mortality (hazard ratio 1.63, 95% confidence interval 1.06 to 2.50, p = 0.028), even after adjusting for Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction flow. These data support the use of STR as a simple method to stratify patients by risk after primary PCI for acute myocardial infarction and support the use of STR as a surrogate end point in reperfusion trials of acute myocardial infarction.