Positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (PET MPI) findings predictive of post-liver transplant major adverse cardiac events.

Positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (PET MPI) is a noninvasive diagnostic test capable of detecting coronary artery disease, structural heart disease, and myocardial flow reserve (MFR). We aimed to determine the prognostic utility of PET MPI to predict post-liver transplant (LT) major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Among the 215 LT candidates that completed PET MPI between 2015 and 2020, 84 underwent LT and had 4 biomarker variables of clinical interest on pre-LT PET MPI (summed stress and difference scores, resting left ventricular ejection fraction, global MFR). Post-LT MACE were defined as acute coronary syndrome, heart failure, sustained arrhythmia, or cardiac arrest within the first 12 months post-LT. Cox regression models were constructed to determine associations between PET MPI variable/s and post-LT MACE. The median LT recipient age was 58 years, 71% were male, 49% had NAFLD, 63% reported prior smoking, 51% had hypertension, and 38% had diabetes mellitus. A total of 20 MACE occurred in 16 patients (19%) at a median of 61.5 days post-LT. One-year survival of MACE patients was significantly lower than those without MACE (54% vs. 98%, p =0.001). On multivariate analysis, reduced global MFR ≤1.38 was associated with a higher risk of MACE [HR=3.42 (1.23-9.47), p =0.019], and every % reduction in left ventricular ejection fraction was associated with an 8.6% higher risk of MACE [HR=0.92 (0.86-0.98), p =0.012]. Nearly 20% of LT recipients experienced MACE within the first 12 months of LT. Reduced global MFR and reduced resting left ventricular ejection fraction on PET MPI among LT candidates were associated with increased risk of post-LT MACE. Awareness of these PET-MPI parameters may help improve cardiac risk stratification of LT candidates if confirmed in future studies.

Predicting Contrast-Induced Renal Complications.

Chronic kidney disease is a major risk factor for developing coronary artery disease, serving as an independent risk factor while overlapping with other risk factors. Percutaneous coronary intervention is a cornerstone of therapy for coronary artery disease and requires contrast media, which can contribute to renal injury. Identifying patients at risk for contrast-induced nephropathy is critical for preventing renal injury, which is associated with short- and long-term mortality. Determination of the potential risk for contrast-induced nephropathy and a new need for dialysis using validated risk prediction tools is a method of identifying patients at high risk for this complication.

The initial U.S. experience with the Tempo active fixation temporary pacing lead in structural heart interventions.

OBJECTIVES: This multicenter retrospective study of the initial U.S. experience evaluated the safety and efficacy of temporary cardiac pacing with the Tempo® Temporary Pacing Lead. BACKGROUND: Despite increasing use of temporary cardiac pacing with the rapid growth of structural heart procedures, temporary pacing leads have not significantly improved. The Tempo lead is a new temporary pacing lead with a soft tip intended to minimize the risk of perforation and a novel active fixation mechanism designed to enhance lead stability. METHODS: Data from 269 consecutive structural heart procedures were collected. Outcomes included device safety (absence of clinically significant cardiac perforation, new pericardial effusion, or sustained ventricular arrhythmia) and efficacy (clinically acceptable pacing thresholds with successful pace capture throughout the index procedure). Postprocedure practices and sustained lead performance were also analyzed. RESULTS: The Tempo lead was successfully positioned in the right ventricle and achieved pacing in 264 of 269 patients (98.1%). Two patients (0.8%) experienced loss of pace capture. Procedural mean pace capture threshold (PCT) was 0.7 ± 0.8 mA. There were no clinically significant perforations, pericardial effusions, or sustained device-related arrhythmias. The Tempo lead was left in place postprocedure in 189 patients (71.6%) for mean duration of 43.3 ± 0.7 hr (range 2.5-221.3 hr) with final PCT of 0.84 ± 1.04 mA (n = 80). Of these patients, 84.1% mobilized out of bed with no lead dislodgment. CONCLUSION: The Tempo lead is safe and effective for temporary cardiac pacing for structural heart procedures, provides stable peri and postprocedural pacing and allows mobilization of patients who require temporary pacing leads.

Door-to-balloon time and mortality among patients undergoing primary PCI.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines for the treatment of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction recommend a door-to-balloon time of 90 minutes or less for patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Door-to-balloon time has become a performance measure and is the focus of regional and national quality-improvement initiatives. However, it is not known whether national improvements in door-to-balloon times have been accompanied by a decline in mortality. METHODS: We analyzed annual trends in door-to-balloon times and in-hospital mortality using data from 96,738 admissions for patients undergoing primary PCI for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction from July 2005 through June 2009 at 515 hospitals participating in the CathPCI Registry. In a subgroup analysis using a linked Medicare data set, we assessed 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Median door-to-balloon times declined significantly, from 83 minutes in the 12 months from July 2005 through June 2006 to 67 minutes in the 12 months from July 2008 through June 2009 (P<0.001). Similarly, the percentage of patients for whom the door-to-balloon time was 90 minutes or less increased from 59.7% in the first year to 83.1% in the last year (P<0.001). Despite improvements in door-to-balloon times, there was no significant overall change in unadjusted in-hospital mortality (4.8% in 2005-2006 and 4.7% in 2008-2009, P=0.43 for trend) or in risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality (5.0% in 2005-2006 and 4.7% in 2008-2009, P=0.34), nor was a significant difference observed in unadjusted 30-day mortality (P=0.64). CONCLUSIONS: Although national door-to-balloon times have improved significantly for patients undergoing primary PCI for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, in-hospital mortality has remained virtually unchanged. These data suggest that additional strategies are needed to reduce in-hospital mortality in this population. (Funded by the National Cardiovascular Data Registry of the American College of Cardiology Foundation.).

Acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is a major cause of morbidity, mortality, and disability. This review summarizes recent advances in the treatment of patients with STEMI. RECENT FINDINGS: The best prehospital and interhospital transfer strategy for patients with STEMI is rapid transport to a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) center by Emergency Medical Services, with prehospital diagnosis and activation of the cardiac catheterization laboratory. Coronary angiography is now recommended for all patients with STEMI. Advances in adjunctive pharmacological and device therapy have improved primary PCI results. Thrombus aspiration, drug-eluting stents, systemic hypothermia for survivors of cardiac arrest with anoxic encephalopathy, and stem cells as reparative therapy have undergone recent evaluation. SUMMARY: Primary PCI with stent implantation as soon as possible is the best treatment strategy for patients with STEMI. Aspirin, bivalirudin, and either prasugrel or ticagrelor are the best antithrombotic agents to support primary PCI. Thrombus aspiration and intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation are important device adjuncts. Systemic hypothermia appears to be an important advance for survivors of cardiac arrest with anoxic encephalopathy, but the benefits of stem cell therapy have yet to be proven.

Cause and circumstance of in-hospital mortality among patients undergoing contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention: a root-cause analysis.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies suggest that most deaths in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are related to procedural complications. Mortality associated with PCI has steadily declined during the past decade, and the cause and circumstance of death among patients undergoing PCI in the contemporary era remain unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We evaluated all patients undergoing PCI at the University of Michigan from 2001 to 2009. There were 85 deaths among a total of 5520 patients undergoing PCI during this time period. By using a standardized data collection form, 3 cardiologists (2 interventional, H.S.G. and D.S.M.; 1 noninvasive, A.M.B.) determined the cause and circumstance of death, in addition to grading the preventability of death. Left ventricular failure was the most common cause of death (35.3%, n=30), followed by neurological compromise (16.5%, n=14) and arrhythmia (12.1%, n=12). The circumstance of death was mostly acute cardiac (52.9%, n=45), with a procedural complication composing a small fraction (7.1%, n=6). Reviewers determined 93% of deaths to be mostly or entirely unpreventable. CONCLUSIONS: Procedural complications are responsible for a small fraction of deaths among patients undergoing contemporary PCI. Measures to further enhance procedural safety are unlikely to translate into meaningful reductions in PCI mortality.

Symptomatic carotid artery stenosis: what is the preferred treatment?

Stroke is a major cause of mortality, morbidity, and disability. Carotid artery disease is the etiology for 15% to 20% of stroke. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) reduces the risk of ipsilateral stroke and death in symptomatic patients with 50% to 99% carotid artery stenosis when the operative risk of stroke or death is less than 6%. Treatment benefit is greater with earlier surgery, more severe stenoses, and older age. Recently, carotid artery stenting (CAS) has emerged as a treatment option, especially in patients with high surgical risk due to anatomic or clinical variables. Nondisabling stroke risk may be higher with CAS than CEA, but the difference is narrowed with the use of embolic protection devices. The risk for myocardial infarction is lower with CAS than CEA. There is no difference in risk for disabling stroke or death. Worse results with new or low-volume CAS operators is a concern. CEA and CAS are complementary revascularization strategies. CEA may be preferred in older patients with complex anatomy or bulky plaques. CAS may be preferred in younger patients and those with restenosis, history of neck radiation, surgical contraindications, or surgically inaccessible lesions. The role for optimal medical therapy as an alternative treatment strategy remains to be defined. Nevertheless, all patients should be treated with lifestyle interventions and secondary risk factor control to target levels to reduce the risk of subsequent atherosclerotic events.

Evaluation of patients with suspected coronary artery disease.

Coronary artery disease affects millions of Americans and is a major cause of global morbidity and mortality. Detection and optimal treatment strategies are needed to reduce the clinical and economic burden of this disease. Chest pain history, risk factor profile, and noninvasive stress test results are used for clinical risk stratification. In high-risk patients, coronary angiography is the standard for anatomic diagnosis and additional risk stratification. All patients with coronary artery disease should be treated with optimal medical therapy. Patients with uncontrolled symptoms or high risk for adverse outcomes benefit from coronary artery revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft surgery.