Transradial versus transfemoral access for cardiac catheterization: a nationwide pilot study of training preferences and expertise in The United States.

BACKGROUND: The objective was to assess current training preferences, expertise, and comfort with transfemoral access (TFA) and transradial access (TRA) amongst cardiovascular training fellows and teaching faculty in the United States. As TRA continues to dominate the field of interventional cardiology, there is a concern that trainees may become less proficient with the femoral approach. METHODS: A detailed questionnaire was sent out to academic General Cardiovascular and Interventional Cardiology training programs in the United States. Responses were sought from fellows-in-training and faculty regarding preferences and practice of TFA and TRA. Answers were analyzed for significant differences between trainees and trainers. RESULTS: A total of 125 respondents (75 fellows-in-training and 50 faculty) completed and returned the survey. The average grade of comfort for TFA, on a scale of 0 to 10 (10 being most comfortable), was reported to be 6 by fellows-in-training and 10 by teaching faculty (p < 0.001). TRA was the first preference in 95% of the fellows-in-training compared to 69% of teaching faculty (p 0.001). While 62% of fellows believed that they would receive the same level of training as their trainers by the time they graduate, only 35% of their trainers believed so (p 0.004). CONCLUSION: The shift from TFA to radial first has resulted in significant concern among cardiovascular fellows-in training and the faculty regarding training in TFA. Cardiovascular training programs must be cognizant of this issue and should devise methods to assure optimal training of fellows in gaining TFA and managing femoral access-related complications.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) at Mercy Health Hospitals, Toledo, Ohio.

IMPORTANCE: The ongoing pandemic of the novel Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an unprecedented challenge to global health, never experienced before. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 admitted to Mercy Hospitals. DESIGN AND METHODS: Retrospective, observational cohort study designed to include every COVID-19 subject aged 18 years or older admitted to Mercy Saint (St) Vincent, Mercy St Charles, and Mercy St Anne's hospital in Toledo, Ohio from January 1, 2020 through June 15th, 2020. Primary Outcome Measure was mortality in the emergency department or as an in-patient. RESULTS: 470 subjects including 224 males and 246 females met the inclusion criteria for the study. Subjects with the following characteristics had higher odds (OR) of death: Older age [OR 8.3 (95% CI 1.1-63.1, p = 0.04)] for subjects age 70 or more compared to subjects age 18-29); Hypertension [OR 3.6 (95% CI 1.6-7.8, p = 0.001)]; Diabetes [OR 3.1 (95% CI 1.7-5.6, p<0.001)]; COPD [OR 3.4 (95% CI 1.8-6.3, p<0.001)] and CKD stage 2 or greater [OR 2.5 (95% CI 1.3-4.9, p = 0.006)]. Combining all age groups, subjects with hypertension had significantly greater odds of the following adverse outcomes: requiring hospital admission (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.4-3.4, p<0.001); needing respiratory support in 24 hours (OR 2.5, 95% CI: 1.7-3.7, p<0.001); ICU admission (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.7-4.4, p<0.001); and death (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.6-7.8, p = 0.001). Hypertension was not associated with needing vent in 24 hours (p = 0.07). CONCLUSION: Age and hypertension were associated with significant comorbidity and mortality in Covid-19 Positive patients. Furthermore, people who were older than 70, and had hypertension, diabetes, COPD, or CKD had higher odds of dying from the disease as compared to patients who hadn't. Subjects with hypertension also had significantly greater odds of other adverse outcomes.