Short-term and long-term outcomes of cardiac arrhythmias in patients with cardiogenic shock.

INTRODUCTION: Cardiogenic shock is severe circulatory failure that results in significant in-hospital mortality, related morbidity, and economic burden. Patients with cardiogenic shock are at high risk for atrial and ventricular arrhythmias, particularly within the subset of patients with an overlap of cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest. AREAS COVERED: This review article will explore the prevalence, definition, management, and outcomes of common arrhythmias in patients with cardiogenic shock. This review will describe the pathophysiology of arrhythmia in cardiogenic shock and the impact of inotropic agents on increased arrhythmogenicity. In addition to medical management, focused assessment of mechanical circulatory support, radiofrequency ablation, deep sedation, and stellate ganglion block will be provided. EXPERT OPINION: We will navigate the limited data and describe the prognostic impacts of arrhythmia. Finally, we will conclude the review with a discussion of prevention strategies, research limitations, and future research directions.

Meta-analysis of Physiology-guided Complete or Culprit lesion-only Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in Myocardial Infarction.

Whether a physiology-guided complete revascularization of non-culprit lesions is superior to culprit lesion-only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with myocardial infarction (MI) and multivessel disease (MVD) remains debated. Online databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing physiology-guided complete revascularization and culprit lesion-only PCI in MI patients. The outcomes of interest were all-cause death, cardiovascular (CV) death, repeat revascularization, MI, stent thrombosis and contrast associated nephropathy/acute kidney injury (AKI). Pooled odds ratios (OR) along with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. A total of 4,849 patients (n = 2,288 physiology-guided complete revascularization, n = 2,561 culprit lesion-only PCI) were included. Mean age was 66 years and 76% were men. At mean follow-up of 2.5 years, physiology-guided complete revascularization was associated with significant reductions in CV death (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54-0.97, p = 0.03) and repeat revascularizations (0.50, 95% CI 0.38-0.66, p < 0.00001) as compared to culprit lesion-only PCI. There were no differences between the two approaches in all-cause death (0.91, 95% CI 0.69-1.19, p = 0.50), MI (0.85, 95% CI 0.59-1.21, p = 0.36), stent thrombosis (1.24, 95% CI 0.58-2.69, p = 0.58) and contrast associated nephropathy/AKI (1.07, 95% CI 0.88-1.31, p = 0.50). In conclusion, among patients with MI and MVD, physiology-guided complete revascularization was associated with significant reductions in CV death and revascularizations when compared to culprit lesion-only PCI.

Race, Ethnicity, and Gender Disparities in Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Cardiovascular disease continues to be the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. Despite advancements in medical care, there remain persistent racial, ethnic, and gender disparity in the diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of individuals with cardiovascular disease. In this review we seek to discuss differences in pathophysiology, clinical course, and risk profiles in the management and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction and related high-risk states. We also seek to highlight the demographic and psychosocial inequities that cause disparities in acute cardiovascular care.

Ultrasound-Assisted Versus Standard Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis for Acute Pulmonary Embolism: Insights From National Inpatient Sample.

Background: Pulmonary embolism is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in the United States. Catheter-directed therapies have emerged as a promising treatment for managing intermediate- and high-risk patients; however, data comparing standard catheter-directed thrombolysis (SCDT) and ultrasound-assisted thrombolysis (USAT) are limited. This study aimed to investigate trends, outcomes, and predictors of mortality of both modalities from a nationally representative sample. Methods: This analysis used data from the National Inpatient Sample years 2016-2020. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. A multivariable regression model was used to compare the outcomes. Results: Among 39,430 patients who received catheter-directed thrombolysis, 26,710 (76.8%) received SCDT and 8060 (23.2%) received USAT. The utilization of SCDT and USAT increased during the study years except for 2020. In-hospital mortality was lower among patients who received USAT (2.7% vs 3.8%; P = .04) compared with patients who received SCDT in the unadjusted analysis. On multivariable regression analysis, there was no difference in the incidence of in-hospital mortality between USAT and SCDT (odds ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.52-1.08; P = .13). There were no significant differences between SCDT and USAT groups in the rate of bleeding adverse events including intracranial hemorrhage (0.6% vs 0.4%; P = .47), and nonintracranial major bleeding (4.2% vs 4.1%; P = .72). Conclusions: Ultrasound-assisted thrombolysis was associated with similar in-hospital mortality and bleeding complications compared with SCDT for acute pulmonary embolism. Further studies are warranted to confirm evaluate the long-term outcomes with both modalities.

Normal-Flow Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis: Comparing the U.S. and European Guidelines.

Patients with normal-flow low-gradient (NFLG) severe aortic stenosis present both diagnostic and management challenges, with debate about the whether this represents true severe stenosis and the need for valve replacement. Studies exploring the natural history without intervention have shown similar outcomes of patients with NFLG severe aortic stenosis to those with moderate aortic stenosis and better outcomes after valve replacement than those with low-flow low-gradient severe aortic stenosis. Most studies (all observational) have shown that aortic valve replacement was associated with a survival benefit vs surveillance. Based on available data, the European Society of Cardiology/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery guidelines and European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging/American Society of Echocardiography suggest that these patients are more likely to have moderate aortic stenosis. This clinical entity is not mentioned in the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines. Here we review the definition of NFLG severe aortic stenosis, potential diagnostic algorithms and points of error, the data supporting different management strategies, and the differing guidelines and outline the unanswered questions in the diagnosis and management of these challenging patients.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Failed Surgical or Transcatheter Bioprosthetic Valves: A Comprehensive Review.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has proven to be a safe, effective, and less invasive approach to aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic stenosis. In patients who underwent prior aortic valve replacement, transcatheter and surgical bioprosthetic valve dysfunction may occur as a result of structural deterioration or nonstructural causes such as prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) and paravalvular regurgitation. Valve-in-Valve (ViV) TAVR is a procedure that is being increasingly utilized for the replacement of failed transcatheter or surgical bioprosthetic aortic valves. Data regarding long-term outcomes are limited due to the recency of the procedure's approval, but available data regarding the short- and long-term outcomes of ViV TAVR are promising. Studies have shown a reduction in perioperative and 30-day mortality with ViV TAVR procedures compared to redo surgical repair of failed bioprosthetic aortic valves, but 1-year and 5-year mortality rates are more controversial and lack sufficient data. Despite the reduction in 30-day mortality, PPM and rates of coronary obstruction are higher in ViV TAVR as compared to both redo surgical valve repair and native TAVR procedures. New transcatheter heart valve designs and new procedural techniques have been developed to reduce the risk of PPM and coronary obstruction. Newer generation valves, new procedural techniques, and increased operator experience with ViV TAVR may improve patient outcomes; however, further studies are needed to better understand the safety, efficacy, and durability of ViV TAVR.

Palliative care in the cardiovascular intensive care unit: A systematic review of current literature.

BACKGROUND: There has been an evolution in the disease severity and complexity of patients presenting to the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU). There are limited data evaluating the role of palliative care in contemporary CICU practice. METHODS: PubMed Central, CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were evaluated for studies on palliative care in adults (≥18 years) admitted with acute cardiovascular conditions - acute myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, cardiac arrest, advanced heart failure, post-cardiac surgery, spontaneous coronary artery dissection, Takotsubo cardiomyopathy, and pulmonary embolism - admitted to the CICU, coronary care unit or cardiovascular intensive care unit from 1/1/2000 to 8/8/2022. The primary outcome of interest was the utilization of palliative care services. Secondary outcomes of included studies were also addressed. Meta-analysis was not performed due to heterogeneity. RESULTS: Of 5711 citations, 30 studies were included. All studies were published in the last seven years and 90 % originated in the United States. Twenty-seven studies (90 %) were retrospective analyses, with a majority from the National Inpatient Sample database. Heart failure was the most frequent diagnosis (47 %), and in-hospital mortality was reported in 67 % of studies. There was heterogeneity in the timing, frequency, and background of the care team that determined palliative care consultation. In two randomized trials, there appeared to be improvement in quality of life without an impact on mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the growing recognition of the role of palliative care, there are limited data on palliative care consultation in the CICU.

Association Between Clinical Trial Participation Status and Outcomes With Mitral Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (M-TEER) for selected patients with severe mitral regurgitation. However, the generalizability of trial results to real-world patients remains uncertain. OBJECTIVES: The authors aimed to compare baseline characteristics and in-hospital outcomes among trial participants with nonparticipants undergoing M-TEER. METHODS: Using the National Inpatient Sample database years 2016-2020, M-TEER admissions were identified and categorized into trial participants vs none. We also identified a cohort of trial noneligible patients based on clinical exclusion criteria from pivotal trials. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to compare in-hospital outcomes. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, and secondary outcomes included in-hospital complications, length of stay, and hospitalization cost. RESULTS: Among 38,770 M-TEER admissions from 2016 to 2020, 11,450 (29.5%) were trial participants, 22,975 (59.3%) were eligible nonparticipants, and 2,960 (7.6%) were noneligible. Baseline characteristics and comorbidity profiles were mostly similar between trial participants vs eligible nonparticipants. In-hospital mortality (adjusted OR [aOR]: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.60-1.62), cardiogenic shock (aOR: 1.06; 95% CI: 0.80-1.42), mechanical circulatory support (aOR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.58-1.41), mechanical ventilation (aOR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.74-1.42), and conversion to mitral valve surgery (aOR: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.57-2.03) were not different between both groups. Conversely, M-TEER for noneligible patients was associated with higher rates of mortality (aOR: 6.27; 95% CI: 3.75-10.45) and complications. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of real-world M-TEER patients would have been eligible for clinical trial participation and had comparable clinical profiles and in-hospital outcomes to trial participants. However, noneligible patients had worse in-hospital outcomes compared with trial participants.

Outcomes with intracoronary vs. intravenous epinephrine in cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND: Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support (ACLS) guidelines recommend intravenous (IV) and intraosseous (IO) epinephrine as a basic cornerstone in the resuscitation process. Data about the efficacy and safety of intracoronary (IC) epinephrine during cardiac arrest in the catheterization laboratory are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To examine the efficacy and safety of IC vs. IV epinephrine for resuscitation during cardiac arrest in the catheterization laboratory. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a prospective observational study that included all patients who experienced cardiac arrest in the cath lab at two tertiary centres in Egypt from January 2015 to July 2022. Patients were divided into two groups according to the route of epinephrine given; IC vs. IV. The primary outcome was survival to hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes included rate of return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), time-to-ROSC, and favourable neurological outcome at discharge defined as modified Rankin Scale (MRS) <3. A total of 162 patients met our inclusion criteria, mean age (60.69 ± 9.61), 34.6% women. Of them, 52 patients received IC epinephrine, and 110 patients received IV epinephrine as part of the resuscitation. Survival to hospital discharge was significantly higher in the IC epinephrine group (84.62% vs. 53.64%, P < 0.001) compared with the IV epinephrine group. The rate of ROSC was higher in the IC epinephrine group (94.23% vs. 70%, P < 0.001) and achieved in a shorter time (2.6 ± 1.97 min vs. 6.8 ± 2.11 min, P < 0.0001) compared with the IV group. Similarly, favourable neurological outcomes were more common in the IC epinephrine group (76.92% vs. 47.27%, P < 0.001) compared with the IV epinephrine group. CONCLUSION: In this observational study, IC epinephrine during cardiac arrest in the cath lab appeared to be safe and may be associated with improved outcomes compared with the IV route. Larger randomized studies are encouraged to confirm these results.

Mitral Valve Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair After TAVR: A Nationwide Analysis.

Patients with persistent severe mitral regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) may benefit from mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (M-TEER). Using the Nationwide Readmission Database, we identified patients who had M-TEER within 6 months after TAVR and compared their outcomes with patients who had M-TEER without previous recent TAVR during the same calendar year between 2014 and 2020. Because Nationwide Readmission Database data do not cross years, analysis was restricted to the last half of each calendar year. End points included in-hospital mortality and 30-day and 90-day postdischarge rehospitalization rates. In 23,885 M-TEER patients, 396 (1.7%) had a previous recent TAVR. The number of post-TAVR M-TEER procedures increased progressively over time from 16 in 2014 to 92 in 2020. Patients who had M-TEER after a recent TAVR versus those without previous TAVR had similar in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.12 to 1.23, p = 0.11), but higher rates of 30-day all-cause hospitalization and heart failure hospitalization (adjusted odds ratios 1.34, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.79, p = 0.04 and 1.63, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.36, p = 0.009, respectively). Nonetheless, in patients who underwent M-TEER post-TAVR, the cumulative 90-day all-cause hospitalization and heart failure hospitalization rates were less after M-TEER compared with before M-TEER (from 45.7% to 31.5%, p = 0.007, and from 29.0% to 16.6%, respectively, both p = 0.005). In conclusion, M-TEER procedures after TAVR in the United States are increasing. Patients with M-TEER after TAVR had similar in-hospital mortality as those who underwent M-TEER without recent TAVR, but higher 30-day hospitalization rates. Nonetheless, 90-day hospitalization rates were decreased after M-TEER in patients with previous TAVR.

Transcatheter edge-to-edge repair for mitral regurgitation using PASCAL or MitraClip.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data regarding the comparative efficacy and safety of Mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (MTEER) using the PASCAL or MitraClip systems for patients with mitral regurgitation (MR). METHODS: An electronic search was conducted for MEDLINE, COCHRANE, and EMBASE, through February 2023, for studies comparing the clinical outcomes of MTEER using PASCAL versus MitraClip systems among patients with severe MR. The primary study outcome was residual MR ≤ 2 at discharge. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. RESULTS: The final analysis included six studies with a total of 1581 patients, with a weighted follow-up period of 3.5 months. Two studies only included patients with degenerative MR, while the remaining studies included both degenerative and functional MR. There was no significant difference in procedure duration between MTEER with the PASCAL or MitraClip systems. There was no difference in residual MR ≤ 2 at discharge (94.7% vs. 91.9%; odds ratio [OR]: 1.44; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.92-2.27) or residual MR ≤ 2 at the mid-term follow-up (94.6% vs. 91.0%, p = 0.05) among the PASCAL versus MitraClip systems. There was no difference between both groups in residual MR ≤ 1 at discharge (73.1% vs. 63.8%, p = 0.12), while there was greater incidence of residual MR ≤ 1 at midterm follow-up with the PASCAL system (71.3% vs. 56.2%, p < 0.001). There was no difference between the PASCAL and MitraClip MTEER systems in technical success (97.0% vs. 97.9%, p = 0.15), procedural success (89.1% vs. 87.1%, p = 0.78), single leaflet detachment (1.8% vs. 1.4%, p = 0.55), or all-cause mortality (3.6% vs. 4.6%, p = 0.71). CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis, we demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety between the PASCAL and MitraClip MTEER systems at short- and mid-term assessments. Randomized trials are warranted to evaluate the comparative long-term outcomes between both MTEER systems.

Meta-Analysis Assessing Efficacy and Safety of Vitamin K Antagonists Versus Direct Oral Anticoagulants for Atrial Fibrillation After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

Patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF) are at a higher risk for thromboembolic and bleeding events. The optimal antithrombotic strategy for patients with AF after TAVI remains unclear. We sought to determine the comparative efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) versus oral vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in these patients. Electronic databases such as PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched till January 31, 2023, for relevant studies evaluating clinical outcomes of VKA versus DOAC in patients with AF after TAVI. Outcomes assessed were (1) all-cause mortality, (2) stroke, (3) major/life-threatening bleeding, and (4) any bleeding. Hazard ratios (HRs) were pooled in meta-analysis using random effect model. Nine studies (2 randomized and 7 observational) were included in systematic review, and 8 studies with 25,769 patients were eligible to be included in the meta-analysis. The mean age of the patients was 82.1 years, and 48.3% were male. Pooled analysis using random-effects model showed no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality (HR 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76 to 1.10, p = 0.33), stroke (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.16, p = 0.70), and major/life-threatening bleeding (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.35, p = 0.70) in patients that received DOAC compared with oral VKA. Risk of any bleeding was lower in the DOAC group compared with oral VKA (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.91, p = 0.0001). In patients with AF, DOACs appear to be a safe alternative oral anticoagulation strategy to oral VKA after TAVI. Further randomized studies are required to confirm the role of DOACs in those patients.

The Cardiovascular Manifestations of COVID-19.

The Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, has resulted in unprecedented morbidity and mortality worldwide. While COVID-19 typically presents as viral pneumonia, cardiovascular manifestations such as acute coronary syndromes, arterial and venous thrombosis, acutely decompensated heart failure (HF), and arrhythmia are frequently observed. Many of these complications are associated with poorer outcomes, including death. Herein we review the relationship between cardiovascular risk factors and outcomes among patients with COVID-19, cardiovascular manifestations of COVID-19, and cardiovascular complications associated with COVID-19 vaccination.