Intracoronary imaging guided percutaneous coronary intervention outcomes among individuals with cardiogenic shock.

BACKGROUND: Limited data exist around the utility of intracoronary imaging (ICI) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and cardiogenic shock (CS), who are inherently at a high risk of stent thrombosis (ST). METHODS: All PCI procedures for ACS patients with CS in England and Wales between 2014 and 2020 were retrospectively analysed, stratified into two groups: ICI and angiography-guided groups. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to examine odds ratios (OR) of in-hospital outcomes, including major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE; composite of all-cause mortality, acute stroke/transient ischaemic attack (TIA), and reinfarction) and major bleeding, in the ICI-guided group compared with angiography-guided PCI. RESULTS: Of 15,738 PCI procedures, 1240(7.9%) were ICI-guided. The rate of ICI use amongst those with CS more than doubled from 2014 (5.7%) to 2020 (13.3%). The ICI-guided group were predominantly younger, males, with a higher proportion of non-ST-elevation ACS and ST. MACCE was significantly lower in the ICI-guided group compared with the angiography-guided group (crude: 29.8% vs. 38.2%, adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.65 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-0.76), driven by lower all-cause mortality (28.6% vs. 37.0%, OR 0.65 95% CI 0.55-0.75). There were no differences in other secondary outcomes between groups. CONCLUSION: ICI use among CS patients has more than doubled over 6 years but remains significantly under-utilized, with less than 1-in-6 patients in receipt of ICI-guided PCI by 2020. ICI-guided PCI is associated with prognostic benefits in CS patients and should be more frequently utilized to increase their long-term survival.

Intravascular Imaging During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.

Coronary angiography has historically served as the gold standard for diagnosis of coronary artery disease and guidance of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Adjunctive use of contemporary intravascular imaging (IVI) technologies has emerged as a complement to conventional angiography-to further characterize plaque morphology and optimize the performance of PCI. IVI has utility for preintervention lesion and vessel assessment, periprocedural guidance of lesion preparation and stent deployment, and postintervention assessment of optimal endpoints and exclusion of complications. The role of IVI in reducing major adverse cardiac events in complex lesion subsets is emerging, and further studies evaluating broader use are underway or in development. This paper provides an overview of currently available IVI technologies, reviews data supporting their utilization for PCI guidance and optimization across a variety of lesion subsets, proposes best practices, and advocates for broader use of these technologies as a part of contemporary practice.

Outcomes of Cardiac Arrest Complicating Acute Myocardial Infarction in Patients With Current and Historical Cancer: An 18-Year United States Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Data regarding cardiac arrest (CA) complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in patients with cancers are limited. METHODS: Using the HCUP-NIS database (2000-2017), we identified adult admissions with AMI-CA and current or historical cancers to evaluate in-hospital mortality, utilization of coronary angiography, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), mechanical circulatory support (MCS), palliative care consultation, do-not-resuscitate status use, among those with current, historical and without cancer. RESULTS: Of 11,622,528 AMI admissions, CA was noted in 584,263 (5.0%). Current and historical cancers were identified in 14,790 (2.5%) and 26,939 (4.6%), respectively. Both current and historical cancer groups were on average older, of white race, had greater comorbidity, and received care at small/medium-sized hospitals compared to those without. The current cancer cohort had the lowest rates of coronary angiography (45.2% vs. 59.2% vs. 63.3%), PCI (32.4% vs. 42.3% vs. 47.0%), MCS (13.5% vs. 16.5% vs. 20.9%) and CABG (4.1% vs. 7.6% vs. 10.2%) compared to the historical cancer and no cancer cohorts (all p < 0.001). Compared to those without, the current (61.1% vs. 44.0%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.25 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.20-1.31], p < 0.001) and historical cancer cohorts (52.2% vs. 44.0%; adjusted OR 1.05 [95% CI 1.01-1.08], p = 0.003) had higher in-hospital mortality. Cancer admissions had higher rates of palliative care consultations and do-not-resuscitate status. CONCLUSION: AMI-CA admissions with cancer were older, had lower utilization of cardiac procedures, and higher rates of palliative care and do-not-resuscitate status and in-hospital mortality compared to those without cancer.

Trends and differences in management and outcomes of cardiac arrest in underweight and obese acute myocardial infarction hospitalizations.

The influence of weight on in-hospital events of acute myocardial infarction complicated with cardiac arrest (AMI-CA) is understudied. To address this, we utilized the National Inpatient Sample database (2008-2017) to identify adult AMI-CA admissions and categorized them by BMI into underweight, normal weight, and overweight/obese groups. The outcomes of interest included differences in in-hospital mortality, use of invasive therapies, hospitalization costs, and hospital length of stay across the three weight categories. Of the 314,609 AMI-CA admissions during the study period, 268,764 (85.4%) were normal weight, 1,791 (0.6%) were underweight, and 44,053 (14.0%) were overweight/obese. Compared to 2008, in 2017, adjusted temporal trends revealed significant increase in prevalence of AMI-CA in underweight (adjusted OR {aOR} 3.88 [95% CI 3.04-4.94], P<0.001) category, and overweight/obese AMI-CA admissions (aOR 2.67 [95% CI 2.53-2.81], P<0.001). AMI-CA admissions that were underweight were older, more often female, with greater comorbidity burden, and presented more often with non-ST-segment-elevation AMI, non-shockable rhythm, and in-hospital arrest. Overweight/obesity was associated with higher use of angiography, PCI, and greater need for mechanical circulatory support whereas underweight status had the lowest use of these procedures. Compared to normal weight AMI-CA admissions, underweight admissions had comparable adjusted in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR 0.97 [95% CI 0.87-1.09], P=0.64) whereas overweight/obese admissions had lower in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR 0.92 [95% CI 0.90-0.95], P<0.001). In conclusion, underweight AMI-CA admissions were associated with lower use of cardiac procedures and had in-hospital mortality comparable to normal weight admissions. Overweight/obese status was associated with higher rates of cardiac procedures and lower in-hospital mortality.

Acute Kidney Injury in Cardiogenic Shock: An Updated Narrative Review.

Acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) is associated with high mortality and morbidity despite advancements in cardiovascular care. AMI-CS is associated with multiorgan failure of non-cardiac organ systems. Acute kidney injury (AKI) is frequently seen in patients with AMI-CS and is associated with worse mortality and outcomes compared to those without. The pathogenesis of AMI-CS associated with AKI may involve more factors than previously understood. Early use of renal replacement therapies, management of comorbid conditions and judicious fluid administration may help improve outcomes. In this review, we seek to address the etiology, pathophysiology, management, and outcomes of AKI complicating AMI-CS.

A comprehensive acute coronary syndrome algorithm for centers with percutaneous coronary intervention capability.

A comprehensive acute coronary syndrome (ACS) protocol was developed to improve the quality of care for patients admitted with definite or probable ACS. These protocols were constructed to streamline the practice for diverse clinicians who care for ACS patients across a variety of clinical settings. They are applicable in the emergency department, the cardiac catheterization laboratory, and the inpatient settings for hospitals with primary percutaneous coronary intervention capability. These protocols standardized the care by selecting the best therapy for each clinical scenario based on available established guidelines to insure the safest and highest value (quality/cost) medical care.