External validation of the PC-ECMO score in postcardiotomy veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

Reliable stratification of the risk of early mortality after postcardiotomy veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A-ECMO) remains elusive. In this study, we externally validated the PC-ECMO score, a specific risk scoring method for prediction of in-hospital mortality after postcardiotomy V-A-ECMO. Overall, 614 patients who required V-A-ECMO after adult cardiac surgery were gathered from an individual patient data meta-analysis of nine studies on this topic. The AUC of the logistic PC-ECMO score in predicting in-hospital mortality was 0.678 (95%CI 0.630-0.726; p < 0.0001). The AUC of the logistic PC-ECMO score in predicting on V-A-ECMO mortality was 0.652 (95%CI 0.609-0.695; p < 0.0001). The Brier score of the logistic PC-ECMO score for in-hospital mortality was 0.193, the slope 0.909, the calibration-in-the-large 0.074 and the expected/observed mortality ratio 0.979. 95%CIs of the calibration belt of fit relationship between observed and predicted in-hospital mortality were never above or below the bisector (p = 0.072). The present findings suggest that the PC-ECMO score may be a valuable tool in clinical research for stratification of the risk of patients requiring postcardiotomy V-A-ECMO.

Inter-institutional analysis of the outcome after postcardiotomy veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

INTRODUCTION: Patients requiring postcardiotomy veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A-ECMO) have a high risk of early mortality. In this analysis, we evaluated whether any interinstitutional difference exists in the results of postcardiotomy V-A-ECMO. METHODS: Studies on postcardiotomy V-A-ECMO were identified through a systematic review for individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis. Analysis of interinstitutional results was performed using direct standardization, estimation of observed/expected in-hospital mortality ratio and propensity score matching. RESULTS: Systematic review of the literature yielded 31 studies. Data from 10 studies on 1269 patients treated at 25 hospitals were available for the present analysis. In-hospital mortality was 66.7%. The relative risk of in-hospital mortality was significantly higher in six hospitals. Observed versus expected in-hospital mortality ratio showed that four hospitals were outliers with significantly increased mortality rates, and one hospital had significantly lower in-hospital mortality rate. Participating hospitals were classified as underperforming and overperforming hospitals if their observed/expected in-hospital mortality was higher or lower than 1.0, respectively. Among 395 propensity score matched pairs, the overperforming hospitals had significantly lower in-hospital mortality (60.3% vs 71.4%, p = 0.001) than underperforming hospitals. Low annual volume of postcardiotomy V-A-ECMO tended to be predictive of poor outcome only when adjusted for patients' risk profile. CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital mortality after postcardiotomy V-A-ECMO differed significantly between participating hospitals. These findings suggest that in many centers there is room for improvement of the results of postcardiotomy V-A-ECMO.

Hyperlactatemia and poor outcome After postcardiotomy veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: An individual patient data meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Postcardiotomy veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A-ECMO) is associated with significant mortality. Identification of patients at very high risk for death is elusive and the decision to initiate V-A-ECMO is based on clinical judgment. The prognostic impact of pre-V-A-ECMO arterial lactate level in these critically ill patients has been herein evaluated. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to identify studies on postcardiotomy VA-ECMO for the present individual patient data meta-analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 1269 patients selected from 10 studies were included in this analysis. Arterial lactate level at V-A-ECMO initiation was increased in patients who died during the index hospitalization compared to those who survived (9.3 vs 6.6 mmol/L, p < 0.0001). Accordingly, in hospital mortality increased along quintiles of pre-V-A-ECMO arterial lactate level (quintiles: 1, 54.9%; 2, 54.9%; 3, 67.3%; 4, 74.2%; 5, 82.2%, p < 0.0001). The best cut-off for arterial lactate was 6.8 mmol/L (in-hospital mortality, 76.7% vs. 55.7%, p < 0.0001). Multivariable multilevel mixed-effect logistic regression model including arterial lactate level significantly increased the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (0.731, 95% CI 0.702-0.760 vs 0.679, 95% CI 0.648-0.711, DeLong test p < 0.0001). Classification and regression tree analysis showed the in-hospital mortality was 85.2% in patients aged more than 70 years with pre-V-A-ECMO arterial lactate level ≥6.8 mmol/L. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients requiring postcardiotomy V-A-ECMO, hyperlactatemia was associated with a marked increase of in-hospital mortality. Arterial lactate may be useful in guiding the decision-making process and the timing of initiation of postcardiotomy V-A-ECMO.

Central versus Peripheral Postcardiotomy Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: Systematic Review and Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether peripheral arterial cannulation is superior to central arterial cannulation for postcardiotomy veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar to identify studies on postcardiotomy VA-ECMO for the present individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis. Analysis was performed according to the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: The investigators of 10 studies agreed to participate in the present IPD meta-analysis. Overall, 1269 patients were included in the analysis. Crude rates of in-hospital mortality after central versus peripheral arterial cannulation for VA-ECMO were 70.7% vs. 63.7%, respectively (adjusted OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.08-1.75). Propensity score matching yielded 538 pairs of patients with balanced baseline characteristics and operative variables. Among these matched cohorts, central arterial cannulation VA-ECMO was associated with significantly higher in-hospital mortality compared to peripheral arterial cannulation VA-ECMO (64.5% vs. 70.8%, p = 0.027). These findings were confirmed by aggregate data meta-analysis, which showed that central arterial cannulation was associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality compared to peripheral arterial cannulation (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.04-1.76, I2 21%). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients requiring postcardiotomy VA-ECMO, central arterial cannulation was associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality compared to peripheral arterial cannulation. This increased risk is of limited magnitude, and further studies are needed to confirm the present findings and to identify the mechanisms underlying the potential beneficial effects of peripheral VA-ECMO.

Lack of Usefulness of Donor-Derived Cell-Free DNA as a Biomarker for Cardiac Allograft Vasculopathy: A Prospective Study.

Background: Cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality among long-term heart transplant recipients. There is an unmet need for a non-invasive biomarker of CAV that could obviate the need to perform surveillance coronary angiograms in these patients. Our aim was to evaluate the performance of Donor-derived Cell Free DNA (dd-cfDNA) as a biomarker of CAV. Methods: We prospectively measured dd-cfDNA levels in all patients undergoing routine coronary angiography >1 year after heart transplant at a single center. Endpoints included the association between dd-cfDNA levels and the presence CAV, according to several prespecified criteria. Results: We included 94 heart transplant recipients, a median of 10.9 years after transplant. Coronary angiogram revealed CAV0, CAV1, CAV2, and CAV3 in 61, 19, 14, and 6% of patients, respectively. Comparison of dd-cfDNA levels in patients with CAV0 and CAV1-2-3 (primary end-point) did not show significant differences (0.92%, IQR 0.46-2.0 vs. 0.46%, IQR 0.075-1.5, p = 0.059), nor did the comparison between patients with stable CAV (no new coronary lesions since previous angiogram, n = 77) and progressive CAV (n = 17); dd-cfDNA values 0.735% (IQR 0.195-2.0) vs. 0.9% (IQR 0.12-1.8), p = 0.76. However, we found an association between NTproBNP levels and CAV degree (p = 0.017). Dd-cfDNA levels did not correlate with NTproBNP (ρ = -0.095). Conclusion: In this study, dd-cfDNA did not perform as a useful biomarker to avoid surveillance coronary angiograms for CAV diagnosis. Clinical Trial Notation: Potential Role of Donor-derived Cell Free DNA as a Biomarker in Cardiac Allograft Vasculopathy, NCT04791852.

External validation and comparison of the CardShock and IABP-SHOCK II risk scores in real-world cardiogenic shock patients.

BACKGROUND: Mortality from cardiogenic shock remains high and early recognition and risk stratification are mandatory for optimal patient allocation and to guide treatment strategy. The CardShock and the Intra-Aortic Balloon Counterpulsation in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock (IABP-SHOCK II) risk scores have shown good results in predicting short-term mortality in cardiogenic shock. However, to date, they have not been compared in a large cohort of ischaemic and non-ischaemic real-world cardiogenic shock patients. METHODS: The Red-Shock is a multicentre cohort of non-selected cardiogenic shock patients. We calculated the CardShock and IABP-SHOCK II risk scores in each patient and assessed discrimination and calibration. RESULTS: We included 696 patients. The main cause of cardiogenic shock was acute coronary syndrome, occurring in 62% of the patients. Compared with acute coronary syndrome patients, non-acute coronary syndrome patients were younger and had a lower proportion of risk factors but higher rates of renal insufficiency; intra-aortic balloon pump was also less frequently used (31% vs 56%). In contrast, non-acute coronary syndrome patients were more often treated with mechanical circulatory support devices (11% vs 3%, p<0.001 for both). Both risk scores were good predictors of in-hospital mortality in acute coronary syndrome patients and had similar areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (area under the curve: 0.742 for the CardShock vs 0.752 for IABP-SHOCK II, p=0.65). Their discrimination performance was only modest when applied to non-acute coronary syndrome patients (0.648 vs 0.619, respectively, p=0.31). Calibration was acceptable for both scores (Hosmer-Lemeshow p=0.22 for the CardShock and 0.68 for IABP-SHOCK II). CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, both the CardShock and the IABP-SHOCK II risk scores were good predictors of in-hospital mortality in acute coronary syndrome-related cardiogenic shock.

External validation and comparison of the CardShock and IABP-SHOCK II risk scores in real-world cardiogenic shock patients.

BACKGROUND: Mortality from cardiogenic shock remains high and early recognition and risk stratification are mandatory for optimal patient allocation and to guide treatment strategy. The CardShock and the Intra-Aortic Balloon Counterpulsation in Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock (IABP-SHOCK II) risk scores have shown good results in predicting short-term mortality in cardiogenic shock. However, to date, they have not been compared in a large cohort of ischaemic and non-ischaemic real-world cardiogenic shock patients. METHODS: The Red-Shock is a multicentre cohort of non-selected cardiogenic shock patients. We calculated the CardShock and IABP-SHOCK II risk scores in each patient and assessed discrimination and calibration. RESULTS: We included 696 patients. The main cause of cardiogenic shock was acute coronary syndrome, occurring in 62% of the patients. Compared with acute coronary syndrome patients, non-acute coronary syndrome patients were younger and had a lower proportion of risk factors but higher rates of renal insufficiency; intra-aortic balloon pump was also less frequently used (31% vs 56%). In contrast, non-acute coronary syndrome patients were more often treated with mechanical circulatory support devices (11% vs 3%, p<0.001 for both). Both risk scores were good predictors of in-hospital mortality in acute coronary syndrome patients and had similar areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (area under the curve: 0.742 for the CardShock vs 0.752 for IABP-SHOCK II, p=0.65). Their discrimination performance was only modest when applied to non-acute coronary syndrome patients (0.648 vs 0.619, respectively, p=0.31). Calibration was acceptable for both scores (Hosmer-Lemeshow p=0.22 for the CardShock and 0.68 for IABP-SHOCK II). CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, both the CardShock and the IABP-SHOCK II risk scores were good predictors of in-hospital mortality in acute coronary syndrome-related cardiogenic shock.

Role of Right Ventricular Strain Measured by Two-Dimensional Echocardiography in the Diagnosis of Cardiac Amyloidosis.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac amyloidosis (CA) causes restrictive cardiomyopathy usually associated with a poor prognosis. Two subtypes predominate: systemic light-chain CA (ALCA) and transthyretin-derived CA (either wild type transthyretin amyloidosis [TTRwt] or mutant transthyretin amyloidosis [TTRm]). Left ventricular (LV) apical sparing has been extensively studied using speckle-tracking echocardiography for diagnosis, but the right ventricular (RV) deformation pattern has not been described. The aims of this study were to characterize RV involvement in patients with CA and to identify parameters that may help in the differential diagnosis between ALCA and transthyretin-derived CA subtypes. METHODS: Seventy-eight patients with CA (47 with ALCA, 20 with TTRwt, and 11 with TTRm) and 24 healthy control subjects were included. Global longitudinal strain (GLS) was analyzed in 16 LV and six RV segments. LV and RV apical ratios (ARs) were obtained. GLS was expressed as an absolute value. RESULTS: LV GLS and free-wall RV longitudinal strain were impaired in all patients (LV GLS: 11.9 ± 2.9% in ALCA, 12.5 ± 3.8% in TTRwt, 14.9 ± 2.7% in TTRm, and 21.9 ± 2.6% in control subjects [P < .01]; free-wall RV longitudinal strain: 13.1 ± 6.8%, 14.9 ± 4.5%, 17.2 ± 3.4%, and 22.1 ± 3.1%, respectively [P < .01]). LV and RV ARs were higher in ALCA compared with both TTRwt, TTRm, and control subjects (LV AR: 1.1 ± 0.2, 0.8 ± 0.2, 0.9 ± 0.1, and 0.7 ± 0.1, respectively [P < .001]; RV AR: 1.1 ± 0.2, 0.6 ± 0.2, 0.6 ± 0.1, and 0.6 ± 0.1, respectively [P < .001]). Cutoff values of LV AR > 0.96 and RV AR > 0.8 showed high accuracy to differentiate between ALCA and transthyretin-derived CA. CONCLUSIONS: RV dysfunction is common in patients with CA. Analysis of RV strain showed an apical sparing pattern, as previously described in the left ventricle, with a higher AR as a specific finding in patients with ALCA. RV AR may be a parameter that can differentiate the subtypes of amyloidosis on the basis of speckle-tracking echocardiographic analysis.

Síndrome de la cimitarra: papel de la cardiorresonancia / Scimitar syndrome: the role of cardiac magnetic resonance

No disponible

Quiste cardiaco gigante: imagen singular de aneurisma ventricular / Giant cardiac cyst: rare image of ventricular aneurysm

No disponible

Use of the radial approach in primary angioplasty: results in 1029 consecutive patients and analyses in unfavorable subgroups.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The transradial approach is associated with a reduction in vascular access-related complications after primary percutaneous coronary interventions. The purpose of this study was to examine the feasibility of the routine use of transradial access in primary angioplasty and to evaluate how it affects subgroups with less favorable characteristics. METHODS: We analyzed 1029 consecutive patients with an ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome treated with primary angioplasty. RESULTS: Transradial access was the primary approach in 93.1% of the patients. The success rate of primary angioplasty was 95.9%, and 87.6% of the patients were event-free 30 days after the procedure. Crossover was required in 3.0% of the patients with primary transradial access, and this rate remained stable over the years. Predictors of the need for crossover were age older than 75 years (odds ratio=2.50, 95% confidence interval, 1.09-5.71; P=.03) and a history of ischemic heart disease (odds ratio=2.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-6.24; P=.02). Primary transfemoral access use was higher in women older than 75 years. Use of the transradial approach in this subgroup did not affect reperfusion time or the success of angioplasty, although there was a greater need for crossover (10.9% vs 2.6%; P=.006). Among patients in cardiogenic shock, the transradial approach was used in 51.5%; reperfusion times and angioplasty success rates were similar to those obtained with transfemoral access, but there was a greater need for crossover. CONCLUSIONS: Transradial access can be used safely and effectively in most primary angioplasty procedures. In older women and in patients in cardiogenic shock, there is a higher crossover requirement, with no detriment to reperfusion time.

Una complicación grave en paciente con asistencia ventricular / A Serious Complication in a Patient With a Ventricular Assist Device

No disponible

El uso del acceso radial en la angioplastia primaria: resultados en 1.029 pacientes consecutivos y análisis en subgrupos desfavorables / Use of the radial approach in primary angioplasty: results in 1029 consecutive patients and analyses in unfavorable subgroups

INTRODUCCIÓN Y OBJETIVO:S: El acceso radial reduce las complicaciones vasculares tras la angioplastia primaria. El objetivo es examinar la factibilidad del acceso radial sistemático en la angioplastia primaria y evaluar cómo afecta a los subgrupos menos favorables. MÉTODOS: Se ha analizado a 1.029 pacientes consecutivos con síndrome coronario agudo con elevación del segmento ST tratados con angioplastia primaria. RESULTADOS: En el 93,1% de los pacientes, el acceso radial ha sido el acceso primario. La tasa de éxito de angioplastia primaria fue del 95,9%, y el 87,6% de los pacientes estaban libres de eventos clínicos a los 30 días del procedimiento. La tasa de cruce vascular fue del 3,0%, estable durante el periodo estudiado. La edad mayor de 75 años (odds ratio = 2,50; intervalo de confianza del 95%, 1,09-5,71; p = 0,03) y la historia de cardiopatía isquémica previa (odds ratio = 2,65, intervalo de confianza del 95%, 1,12-6,24; p = 0,02) fueron predictores de necesidad de cruce. En las mujeres y los mayores de 75 años, el uso del acceso femoral primario fue mayor. Sin embargo, en este subgrupo de pacientes el acceso radial no afectó a los tiempos de reperfusión ni al éxito de la angioplastia, aunque sí se observó una mayor tasa de cruce (el 10,9 frente al 2,6%; p = 0,006). En los pacientes en shock cardiogénico, el acceso radial se utilizó en el 51,5% de los casos, con tiempos de reperfusión y tasas de éxito de la angioplastia similares a los del acceso femoral, aunque con mayor necesidad de cruce. CONCLUSIONES: El acceso radial se puede utilizar de manera segura y eficaz en la mayoría de las angioplastias primarias. En mujeres de edad avanzada y en pacientes en shock, aumenta la necesidad de cruce sin penalizar los tiempos de reperfusión

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The transradial approach is associated with a reduction in vascular access-related complications after primary percutaneous coronary interventions. The purpose of this study was to examine the feasibility of the routine use of transradial access in primary angioplasty and to evaluate how it affects subgroups with less favorable characteristics. METHODS: We analyzed 1029 consecutive patients with an ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome treated with primary angioplasty. RESULTS: Transradial access was the primary approach in 93.1% of the patients. The success rate of primary angioplasty was 95.9%, and 87.6% of the patients were event-free 30 days after the procedure. Crossover was required in 3.0% of the patients with primary transradial access, and this rate remained stable over the years. Predictors of the need for crossover were age older than 75 years (odds ratio=2.50, 95% confidence interval, 1.09-5.71; P=.03) and a history of ischemic heart disease (odds ratio=2.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-6.24; P=.02). Primary transfemoral access use was higher in women older than 75 years. Use of the transradial approach in this subgroup did not affect reperfusion time or the success of angioplasty, although there was a greater need for crossover (10.9% vs 2.6%; P=.006). Among patients in cardiogenic shock, the transradial approach was used in 51.5%; reperfusion times and angioplasty success rates were similar to those obtained with transfemoral access, but there was a greater need for crossover. CONCLUSIONS: Transradial access can be used safely and effectively in most primary angioplasty procedures. In older women and in patients in cardiogenic shock, there is a higher crossover requirement, with no detriment to reperfusion time