Comparison of nationwide trends in 30-day readmission rates after carotid artery stenting and carotid endarterectomy.

OBJECTIVE: Carotid revascularization procedures, carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA), are among the most common vascular interventions performed in the United States, with significant resource utilization. Whereas multiple studies have reported outcomes after these procedures, data regarding 30-day readmission rates after these interventions remain scant. METHODS: The U.S. Nationwide Readmission Database (2010-2014) was queried to identify all patients ≥18 years who were readmitted within 30 days after a hospital discharge for CEA or CAS. RESULTS: Among 476,260 patients included, 13.5% underwent CAS and 86.5% underwent CEA. The combined 30-day readmission rate for all carotid revascularization procedures was 9.2% (10.6% after CAS and 9.0% after CEA). After 1:3 propensity matching, CAS was associated with higher risk of readmission compared with CEA (10.4% vs 9.4%). Neurologic complications and cardiac conditions were the two most common causes of readmission after both CAS (29.7% and 23.7%, respectively) and CEA (28.2% and 21.7%, respectively). The 30-day readmission rates were higher in CAS patients across all age groups as well as in those with a low or high baseline burden of comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: In this large nationwide study, CAS was associated with higher 30-day readmission rates compared with CEA irrespective of age or baseline burden of comorbidities. Neurologic or cardiac adverse events were responsible for >50% of readmissions after CAS and CEA.

Meta-analysis of fractional flow reserve guided complete revascularization versus infarct related artery only revascularization in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Multivessel coronary artery disease is found in 30-50% of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (MI) and is associated with adverse outcomes. It is not yet clear if outcomes are improved by utilizing fractional flow reserve (FFR) guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of noninfarct related artery (non-IRA) along with primary PCI. METHODS AND RESULTS: To evaluate this, we performed a metanalysis of published randomized controlled trials by performing systematic search of PubMed, Medline, Google Scholar and Cochrane Central. Three studies met the inclusion criteria, with total of 1633 patients; 689 underwent FFR-guided complete revascularization and 944 underwent IRA only revascularization. FFR-guided PCI of non-IRA along with primary PCI led to significant reduction of major adverse cardiovascular events (composite of death, MI and repeat revascularization) compared to PCI of IRA only [odds ratio (OR) = 0.55; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.42-0.72; P < 0.001]. This difference was primarily due to significant reduction in repeat revascularization (OR = 0.37; 95% CI = 0.26-0.53; P < 0.001). The rates of all-cause mortality (OR = 1.24; 95% CI = 0.65-2.35; P = 0.51) and MI (OR = 0.79; 95% CI = 0.46-1.36; P = 0.48) were similar in two groups. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrated that FFR-guided PCI of non-IRA along with primary PCI was associated with lower rate of major adverse cardiovascular events compared with PCI of IRA-only in patients with ST-elevation MI and multivessel disease. The difference was driven by lower rate of repeat revascularization in FFR-guided PCI of non-IRA group.

Frequency of 30-Day Readmission and Its Causes After Endovascular Aneurysm Intervention of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (from the Nationwide Readmission Database).

Endovascular aneurysm intervention (EVAI) is one of the most commonly performed vascular interventions for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Data regarding 30-day readmission rates after EVAI are poorly reported in the literature. We used the United States Nationwide Readmission Database from 2010 to 2014 to identify all patients ≥18 years who were readmitted within 30 days after a hospital discharge for EVAI of the AAA. Incidence, etiologies, predictors of 30-day readmission, and trends of readmission rates were analyzed. In 138,014 patients who survived to discharge after an EVAI procedure for AAA, 14,146 (10.24%) were readmitted within 30 days. Median time to readmission was 11 days. Cardiac causes (16.34%) followed by infections (15.40%) and vascular complications (12.86%) were common etiologies of readmission. Greater patient age, female sex, coexisting co-morbidities such as heart failure, atrial fibrillation, peripheral vascular disease, lung disease, and chronic kidney disease were independent predictors of 30-day readmission. In-hospital complications during an index admission such as major bleeding or vascular complications were also predictive of 30-day readmission. Trend analysis showed a progressive decline in readmission rates from 11.3% in 2010 to 9.6% in 2014 (ptrend <0.0001), 20% lower odds in 2014 compared with 2010 (odds ratio 0.80, 95% confidence interval 0.72 to 0.87, p <0.0001). In this contemporary study of EVAI for AAA, nearly 1 in 10 patients was readmitted within 30 days of discharge after an index admission. Cardiac complications and infections were common causes of readmission within 30 days.

Meta-analysis of drug eluting stents compared with bare metal stents in high bleeding risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of drug-eluting stents (DESs) and bare metal stents (BMSs) when used with short or tailored dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in high bleeding risk (HBR) patients. BACKGROUND: DES have been shown to reduce target lesion revascularization (TLR) as well as stent thrombosis (ST) compared to BMS in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, patients at HBR continue to receive BMS given the fear of bleeding or ST from premature discontinuation of DAPT in patients receiving DES. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials by performing systematic search for studies comparing DES with BMS in HBR patients using PUBMED, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central, reported until March 1, 2018. RESULTS: Three randomized controlled studies met the inclusion criteria with total of 4,460 patients; 50% received DES. Major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE); composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), and TLR, at 1 year was significantly lower (RR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.50-0.80) in DES group compared to BMS. This difference was primarily driven by lower TLR (RR = 0.46, 95% CI 0.35-0.61) in DES group. Definite or probable ST (RR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.32-1.08) and major (RR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.74-1.20) bleeding were similar. CONCLUSIONS: DES was associated with lower MACE without increased risk of bleeding or ST compared to BMS when used with short or tailored DAPT in patients with HBR.

Tryton dedicated bifurcation stent in treatment of unprotected distal left main bifurcation disease.

Percutaneous coronary interventions involving coronary bifurcation lesions are more complex and associated with adverse outcomes (both angiographic and clinical) compared to non-bifurcation lesions. Tryton, a dedicated bifurcation stent, has been introduced with the aim to simplify treatment of bifurcation lesions. Tryton stent in combination with conventional drug eluting stent is safe and associated with reduced stenosis and bail-out stenting of side branch compared to provisional stenting involving a large side. However, little is known regarding safety and efficacy of Tryton stent in left main (LM) bifurcation lesion. We describe two cases of unprotected LM bifurcation stenting using Tryton stent in combination with drug eluting stent.

Early Versus Delayed Use of Ultrasound-Assisted Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis in Patients With Acute Submassive Pulmonary Embolism.

OBJECTIVES: The effect of early vs delayed use of ultrasound-assisted catheter-directed thrombolysis (USAT) on invasive hemodynamics and in-hospital outcomes in patients with acute submassive pulmonary embolism (PE) is not well known. METHODS: We evaluated 41 patients with submassive PE to study the association of early USAT (≤24 hours; n = 21) vs delayed USAT (>24 hours; n = 20) with change in invasive hemodynamic measures from pre USAT to post USAT. RESULTS: Significantly greater improvement was observed in the early USAT group compared to the delayed group for median cardiac index (0.6 L/min/m² [IQR, 0.4-1.1 L/min/ m²] vs 0.4 L/min/m² [IQR, 0.1-0.6 L/min/m²]; P=.03), median pulmonary vascular resistance (3.4 Wood units [IQR, 2.5-4.1 Wood units] vs 0.5 Wood units [IQR, 0.2-1.3 Wood units]; P<.001), and mean right ventricular stroke work index (3.5 ± 2.0 g-m/m²/beat vs 2.3 ± 1.6 g-m/m2/beat; P=.04). Although not statistically significant, a trend in favor of early treatment was found for improvement in mean right ventricle to left ventricle diameter ratio (0.38 ± 0.17 vs 0.33 ± 0.21; P=.40), mean pulmonary artery pressure (8.4 ± 7.1 mm Hg vs 5.3 ± 5.2 mm Hg; P=.13), and median pulmonary artery pulsatility index (1.14 [IQR, 2.01-0.45] vs 0.65 [IQR, 0.22-1.78]; P=.49). The mean postprocedural length of stay was significantly lower in the early-USAT group (6.0 ± 2.7 days vs 10.1 ± 7.0 days; P=.02). Three patients experienced moderate bleeding (2 patients in the early-USAT group and 1 patient in the delayed-USAT group) and no major bleeds or in-hospital mortality occurred. CONCLUSION: Early USAT was associated with greater improvement in pulmonary hemodynamics and shorter postprocedural length of stay compared with delayed USAT in patients with acute submassive PE.

Valve in valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) versus redo-Surgical aortic valve replacement (redo-SAVR): A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Bioprosthetic (BP) valves have been increasingly used for aortic valve replacement over the last decade. Due to their limited durability, patients presenting with failed BP valves are rising. Valve in Valve - Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (ViV-TAVI) emerged as an alternative to the gold standard redo-Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement (redo-SAVR). However, the utility of ViV-TAVI is poorly understood. METHODS: A systematic electronic search of the scientific literature was done in PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Only studies which compared the safety and efficacy of ViV-TAVI and redo-SAVR head to head in failed BP valves were included. RESULTS: Six observational studies were eligible and included 594 patients, of whom 255 underwent ViV- TAVI and 339 underwent redo-SAVR. There was no significant difference between ViV-TAVI and redo- SAVR for procedural, 30 day and 1 year mortality rates. ViV-TAVI was associated with lower risk of permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) (OR: 0.43, CI: 0.21-0.89; P = 0.02) and a trend toward increased risk of paravalvular leak (PVL) (OR: 5.45, CI: 0.94-31.58; P = 0.06). There was no significant difference for stroke, major bleeding, vascular complications and postprocedural aortic valvular gradients more than 20 mm-hg. CONCLUSION: Our results reiterate the safety and feasibility of ViV-TAVI for failed aortic BP valves in patients deemed to be at high risk for surgery. VIV-TAVI was associated with lower risk of permanent pacemaker implantation with a trend toward increased risk of paravalvular leak.

Long-term outcomes of patients with diabetes mellitus undergoing percutaneous intervention for popliteal and infrapopliteal peripheral arterial disease.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association of diabetes mellitus (DM) with clinical and angiographic characteristics and outcomes of patients with popliteal and infrapopliteal peripheral arterial disease (PAD) undergoing peripheral vascular intervention (PVI). BACKGROUND: Clinical features and outcomes in patients with DM and popliteal or infrapopliteal PAD undergoing PVI are not well described. METHODS: Using the data from the laser in popliteal and infrapopliteal stenosis study, we retrospectively examined the association of diabetes with clinical and angiographic characteristics and risk adjusted short- and intermediate term outcomes (all cause death, major adverse events (MAE) [composite of death, ipsilateral major amputation, or repeat revascularization]) in patients with popliteal and infrapopliteal PAD undergoing PVI for critical limb ischemia treated either with laser-assisted balloon angioplasty or balloon angioplasty alone. RESULTS: Of 714 patients, 418 had DM (58.5%). Patients with DM were younger with higher prevalence of history of coronary artery disease, heart failure, end-stage renal disease, and prior contralateral limb amputation compared to those without DM. At 5 years, mean event free survival for all cause mortality (39.9 vs. 45.5 months; P = 0.001), MAE (29.3 vs. 36.8 months; P < 0.001), ipsilateral major amputation (55.3 vs. 57.4 months; P = 0.001), and repeat revascularization (42.0 vs. 45.8 months; P = 0.03) were significantly lower in DM patients. On multivariate analysis, DM was associated with significantly higher all cause mortality (HR = 1.83, 95% CI 1.33-2.52), MAE (HR = 1.73, 95% CI 1.35-2.23), and ipsilateral major amputation (HR = 5.52, 95% CI 1.82-16.71). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with popliteal and infrapopliteal PAD undergoing PVI, DM was associated with higher mortality, major amputations and MAE that was independent of baseline comorbidities. Our data suggested the need for future studies evaluating existing and/or novel therapies to improve the poor long-term outcomes in diabetic patients with popliteal and infrapopliteal PAD.

Utilization of the Impella for hemodynamic support during percutaneous intervention and cardiogenic shock: an insight.

INTRODUCTION: Impella is a catheter-based micro-axial flow pump placed across the aortic valve, and it is currently the only percutaneous left ventricular assist device approved for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention and cardiogenic shock. Areas Covered: Even though several studies have repeatedly demonstrated the excellent hemodynamic profile of Impella in high-risk settings, it remains underutilized. Here we aim to provide an up-to-date summary of the available literature on Impellas use in High risk settings as well as the practical aspects of its usage. Expert Commentary: Percutaneous coronary interventions in high rsk settings have always been challenging for a physician. Impella 2.5 and CP, have been proven safe, cost effective and feasible in High Risk Percutaneous coronary Interventions with an excellent hemodynamic profile.

Gender, Racial, and Health Insurance Differences in the Trend of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator (ICD) Utilization: A United States Experience Over the Last Decade.

Prior studies have highlighted disparities in cardiac lifesaving procedure utilization, particularly among women and in minorities. Although there has been a significant increase in implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) insertion, socioeconomic disparities still exist in the trend of ICD utilization. With the use of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2003 through 2011, we identified subjects with ICD insertion (procedure code 37.94) and cardiac resynchronization defibrillator (procedure code 00.50, 00.51) as codified by the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification. Overall, 1 020 076 ICDs were implanted in the United States from 2003 to 2011. We observed an initial increase in ICD utilization by 51%, from 95 062 in 2003 to 143 262 in 2006, followed by a more recent decline. The majority of ICDs were implanted in men age ≥65 years. Implantation of ICDs was 2.5× more common in men than in women (402 per million vs 163 per million). Approximately 95% of the ICDs were implanted in insured patients, and 5% were used in the uninsured population. There has been a significant increase in ICD implantation in blacks, from 162 per million in 2003 to 291 per million in 2011. We found a significant difference in the volume of ICD implants between the insured and the uninsured patient populations. Racial disparities have narrowed significantly in comparison with those noted in earlier studies and are now more reflective of the population demographics at large. On the other hand, significant gender disparities continue to exist.