Who Should Undergo CTO PCI and When?: An Evidence-Based Approach to the Patient Referred for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Chronic Total Occlusion.

Chronic total occlusions (CTO) of the coronary arteries are common among patients presenting to the cardiac catheterization laboratory, and data suggests a worse overall prognosis in patients with CTOs. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of CTOs has been shown to improve anginal symptoms in observational studies and in a limited number of randomized trials. However, CTO PCI has not been shown to lead to a reduction in other important endpoints such as myocardial infarction or death. Further, despite recent advances in the field, CTO PCI still carries higher risks and a lower likelihood of success when compared with non-CTO PCI. Thus, determining which patients may be appropriate for CTO PCI is challenging, and must involve a comprehensive risk-benefit analysis and discussion with the patient. To this end, we review the currently available data regarding CTO PCI, including the clinical outcomes, role of preprocedural ischemia testing, and various procedural success and risk stratification scores. Finally, we present our approach to the patient referred for CTO PCI.

Acute pulmonary embolism following recent hospitalization or surgery.

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a major cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Recent hospitalization or surgery is a leading risk factor for PE, yet there are minimal data examining its effect on treatment and outcomes. We conducted a retrospective review of institutional billing codes for hospitalized patients with acute PE from August 2012 to August 2018. Patients were stratified based on whether they had a recent major medical encounter (MME), defined as surgery or hospitalization within 90 days. Primary outcomes included in-hospital mortality and 30- and 90-day readmission rates. Secondary outcomes included length of stay (LOS), use of advanced therapies, major bleeding, discharge anticoagulation and recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) at 90 days. Outcomes were adjusted for confounders using multivariable regression modeling. 2063 patients were hospitalized for an acute PE; 633 (30.7%) had a recent MME. Patients with a recent MME had a higher average Charlson Comorbidity Index (4.6 vs. 4.0, p < 0.01). Both 30- and 90-day readmission rates were higher in patients with a recent MME (21.7% vs. 14.4%; adjusted OR 1.06 [1.00, 1.12], p = 0.037; 30.8% vs 18.7%; adjusted OR 1.11 [1.11, 1.62], p = 0.003, respectively). After adjustment, there were no between-group differences in in-hospital mortality, LOS, use of advanced therapies, major bleeding, or recurrent VTE at 90 days. In-hospital mortality was higher for patients with a recent medical hospitalization compared to those with a recent surgery (10.2% vs. 5.6%, adjusted OR 1.08 [1.01, 1.15] p = 0.032). Despite recent hospitalization and/or surgery and greater number of comorbidities, patients admitted with a PE and recent MME had similar in-hospital outcomes, but experienced higher readmission rates. In-hospital mortality was higher in those with a recent medical compared to surgical encounter. Clinicians should optimize post-discharge transitional care in this subset of patients.

Changes in Care for Acute Pulmonary Embolism Through A Multidisciplinary Pulmonary Embolism Response Team.

BACKGROUND: Optimal management of acute pulmonary embolism requires expertise offered by multiple subspecialties. As such, pulmonary embolism response teams (PERTs) have increased in prevalence, but the institutional consequences of a PERT are unclear. METHODS: We compared all patients that presented to our institution with an acute pulmonary embolism in the 3 years prior to and 3 years after the formation of our PERT. The primary outcome was in-hospital pulmonary embolism-related mortality before and after the formation of the PERT. Sub-analyses were performed among patients with elevated-risk pulmonary embolism. RESULTS: Between August 2012 and August 2018, 2042 patients were hospitalized at our institution with acute pulmonary embolism, 884 (41.3%) pre-PERT implementation and 1158 (56.7%) post-PERT implementation, of which 165 (14.2%) were evaluated by the PERT. There was no difference in pulmonary embolism-related mortality between the two time periods (2.6% pre-PERT implementation vs 2.9% post-PERT implementation, P = .89). There was increased risk stratification assessment by measurement of cardiac biomarkers and echocardiograms post-PERT implementation. Overall utilization of advanced therapy was similar between groups (5.4% pre-PERT implementation vs 5.4% post-PERT implementation, P = 1.0), with decreased use of systemic thrombolysis (3.8% pre-PERT implementation vs 2.1% post-PERT implementation, P = 0.02) and increased catheter-directed therapy (1.3% pre-PERT implementation vs 3.3% post-PERT implementation, P = 0.05) post-PERT implementation. Inferior vena cava filter use decreased after PERT implementation (10.7% pre-PERT implementation vs 6.9% post-PERT implementation, P = 0.002). Findings were similar when analyzing elevated-risk patients. CONCLUSION: Pulmonary embolism response teams may increase risk stratification assessment and alter application of advanced therapies, but a mortality benefit was not identified.

Readmissions after acute type B aortic dissection.

OBJECTIVE: Acute type B aortic dissection can be treated with medical management alone, open surgical repair, or thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). The nationwide burden of readmissions after acute type B aortic dissection has not been comprehensively assessed. METHODS: We analyzed adults with a hospitalization due to acute type B aortic dissection between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2014, in the Nationwide Readmissions Database. International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes were used to identify hospitalizations with a primary diagnosis code for thoracic or thoracoabdominal aortic dissection. The primary outcome was nonelective 90-day readmission. Predictors of readmission were determined using hierarchical logistic regression. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 6937 patients with unplanned admissions for type B aortic dissections from 2010 through 2014. Medical management alone was the treatment for 62.6% of patients, 21.0% had open surgical repair, and 16.4% underwent TEVAR. Nonelective 90-day readmission rate was 25.1% (23.6% with medical management alone, 26.9% with open repair, and 28.7% with TEVAR; P < .001). An additional 4.7% of patients were electively readmitted. The most common cause for nonelective readmission was new or recurrent arterial aneurysm or dissection (24.8%). Of those with unplanned readmissions, 5.2% underwent an aortic procedure. The mortality rate during nonelective readmission was 5.0%, and the mean cost of the rehospitalization was $22,572 ± $41,598. CONCLUSIONS: More than one in four patients have a nonelective readmission 90 days after hospitalization for acute type B aortic dissection. Absolute rates of readmission varied by initial treatment received but were high irrespective of the initial treatment. The most common cause of readmission was aortic disease, particularly among those treated with medication alone. Further research is required to determine potential interventions to decrease these costly and morbid readmissions, including the role of multidisciplinary aortic teams.