Reperfusion in Patients With ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction With Cardiogenic Shock and Prolonged Interhospital Transport Times

BACKGROUND

In patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock, primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) is the preferred revascularization option. Little is known about the efficacy and safety of a pharmacoinvasive approach for patients with cardiogenic shock presenting to a non-PCI hospital with prolonged interhospital transport times.

METHODS

In a retrospective analysis of geographically extensive ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction network (2006-2021), 426 patients with cardiogenic shock and ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction presented to a non-PCI-capable hospital and underwent reperfusion therapy (53.8% pharmacoinvasive and 46.2% pPCI). The primary clinical outcome was a composite of in-hospital mortality, renal failure requiring dialysis, cardiac arrest, or mechanical circulatory support, and the primary safety outcome was major bleeding defined as an intracranial hemorrhage or bleeding that required transfusion was compared in an inverse probability weighted model. The electrocardiographic reperfusion outcome of interest was the worst residual ST-segment-elevation.

RESULTS

Patients with pharmacoinvasive treatment had longer median interhospital transport (3 hours versus 1 hour) and shorter median symptom-onset-to-reperfusion (125 minute-to-needle versus 419 minute-to-balloon) times. ST-segment resolution ≥50% on the postfibrinolysis ECG was 56.6%. Postcatheterization, worst lead residual ST-segment-elevation <1 mm (57.3% versus 46.3%; P=0.01) was higher in the pharmacoinvasive compared with the pPCI cohort, but no differences were observed in the worst lead ST-segment-elevation resolution ≥50% (77.4% versus 81.8%; P=0.57). The primary clinical end point was lower in the pharmacoinvasive cohort (35.2% versus 57.0%; inverse probability weighted odds ratio, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.26-0.72]; P<0.01) compared with patients who received pPCI. An interaction between interhospital transfer time and reperfusion strategy with all-cause mortality was observed, favoring a pharmacoinvasive approach with transfer times >60 minutes. The incidence of the primary safety outcome was 10.1% in the pharmacoinvasive arm versus 18.7% in pPCI (adjusted odds ratio, 0.41 [95% CI, 0.14-1.09]; P=0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction presenting with cardiogenic shock and prolonged interhospital transport times, a pharmacoinvasive approach was associated with improved electrocardiographic reperfusion and a lower rate of death, dialysis, or mechanical circulatory support without an increase in major bleeding.

Change Management Accompanying Implementation of Decision Support for Prevention of Acute Kidney Injury in Cardiac Catheterization Units: Program Report

Purpose of program

Different models exist to guide successful implementation of electronic health tools into clinical practice. The Contrast Reducing Injury Sustained by Kidneys (Contrast RISK) initiative introduced an electronic decision support tool with physician audit and feedback into all of the cardiac catheterization facilities in Alberta, Canada, with the goal of preventing contrast-associated acute kidney injury (CA-AKI) following coronary angiography and intervention. This report describes the change management approaches used by the initiative and end-user's feedback on these processes.

Sources of information and methods

The Canada Health Infoway Change Management model was used to address 6 activities relevant to project implementation: governance and leadership, stakeholder engagement, communications, workflow analysis and integration, training and education, and monitoring and evaluation. Health care providers and invasive cardiologists from all sites completed preimplementation, usability, and postimplementation surveys to assess integration and change success.

Key findings

Prior to implementation, 67% of health providers were less than satisfied with processes to determine appropriate contrast dye volumes, 47% were less than satisfied with processes for administering adequate intravenous fluids, and 68% were less than satisfied with processes to ensure follow-up of high-risk patients. 48% of invasive cardiologists were less than satisfied with preprocedural identification of patients at risk of acute kidney injury (AKI). Following implementation, there were significant increases among health providers in the odds of satisfaction with processes for identifying those at high risk of AKI (odds ratio [OR] 3.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.36-6.66, P = .007), quantifying the appropriate level of contrast dye for each patient (OR 6.98, 95% CI 3.06-15.91, P < .001), determining the optimal amount of IV fluid for each patient (OR 1.86, 95% CI 0.88-3.91, P = .102), and following up of kidney function of high risk patients (OR 5.49, 95%CI 2.45-12.30, P < .001). There were also significant increases among physicians in the odds of satisfaction with processes for identifying those at high risk of AKI (OR 19.53, 95% CI 3.21-118.76, P = .001), quantifying the appropriate level of contrast dye for each patient (OR 26.35, 95% CI 4.28-162.27, P < .001), and for following-up kidney function of high-risk patients (OR 7.72, 95% CI 1.62-36.84.30, P = .010). Eighty-nine percent of staff perceived the initiative as being successful in changing clinical practices to reduce the risk of CA-AKI. Physicians uniformly agreed that the system was well-integrated into existing workflows, while 42% of health providers also agreed.

Implications

The Canada Health Infoway Change Management model was an effective framework for guiding implementation of an electronic decision support tool and audit and feedback intervention to improve processes for AKI prevention within cardiac catheterization units.

Effect of Clinical Decision Support With Audit and Feedback on Prevention of Acute Kidney Injury in Patients Undergoing Coronary Angiography: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Contrast-associated acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication of coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) that has been associated with high costs and adverse long-term outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a multifaceted intervention is effective for the prevention of AKI after coronary angiography or PCI.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A stepped-wedge, cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted in Alberta, Canada, that included all invasive cardiologists at 3 cardiac catheterization laboratories who were randomized to various start dates for the intervention between January 2018 and September 2019. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older who underwent nonemergency coronary angiography, PCI, or both; who were not undergoing dialysis; and who had a predicted AKI risk of greater than 5%. Thirty-four physicians performed 7820 procedures among 7106 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Participant follow-up ended in November 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

During the intervention period, cardiologists received educational outreach, computerized clinical decision support on contrast volume and hemodynamic-guided intravenous fluid targets, and audit and feedback. During the control (preintervention) period, cardiologists provided usual care and did not receive the intervention.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was AKI. There were 12 secondary outcomes, including contrast volume, intravenous fluid administration, and major adverse cardiovascular and kidney events. The analyses were conducted using time-adjusted models.

RESULTS

Of the 34 participating cardiologists who were divided into 8 clusters by practice group and center, the intervention group included 31 who performed 4327 procedures among 4032 patients (mean age, 70.3 [SD, 10.7] years; 1384 were women [32.0%]) and the control group included 34 who performed 3493 procedures among 3251 patients (mean age, 70.2 [SD, 10.8] years; 1151 were women [33.0%]). The incidence of AKI was 7.2% (310 events after 4327 procedures) during the intervention period and 8.6% (299 events after 3493 procedures) during the control period (between-group difference, -2.3% [95% CI, -0.6% to -4.1%]; odds ratio [OR], 0.72 [95% CI, 0.56 to 0.93]; P = .01). Of 12 prespecified secondary outcomes, 8 showed no significant difference. The proportion of procedures in which excessive contrast volumes were used was reduced to 38.1% during the intervention period from 51.7% during the control period (between-group difference, -12.0% [95% CI, -14.4% to -9.4%]; OR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.65 to 0.90]; P = .002). The proportion of procedures in eligible patients in whom insufficient intravenous fluid was given was reduced to 60.8% during the intervention period from 75.1% during the control period (between-group difference, -15.8% [95% CI, -19.7% to -12.0%]; OR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.53 to 0.87]; P = .002). There were no significant between-group differences in major adverse cardiovascular events or major adverse kidney events.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among cardiologists randomized to an intervention including clinical decision support with audit and feedback, patients undergoing coronary procedures during the intervention period were less likely to develop AKI compared with those treated during the control period, with a time-adjusted absolute risk reduction of 2.3%. Whether this intervention would show efficacy outside this study setting requires further investigation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03453996.

Ticagrelor or clopidogrel dual antiplatelet therapy following a pharmacoinvasive strategy in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

Objectives

To describe and evaluate outcomes in STEMI patients sustained on clopidogrel compared to those switched to ticagrelor following fibrinolysis.

Background

World‐wide, many STEMI patients cannot achieve timely PCI and therefore require fibrinolysis. Although comparable 30‐day and 1‐year safety was shown with clopidogrel or ticagrelor in the TREAT study, there is paucity of long‐term outcomes in pharmacoinvasive treated STEMI.

Methods

We conducted an observational cohort study evaluating consecutive pharmacoinvasive STEMI patients treated in a network, comparing those switched to ticagrelor to those sustained on clopidogrel. The primary efficacy composite was one‐year all‐cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction, and stroke with major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) as the safety outcomes. Multivariable Cox regression model was used to examine the association between P2Y12 inhibitor and outcomes with inverse probability weighting.

Results

Of 1426 pharmacoinvasive STEMI patients, 28% (n = 396) were converted to ticagrelor at a mean of 9.9 h after fibrinolysis with comparable GRACE Risk Scores (median; 158 vs 157, p0.352). The primary composite occurred in 3.5% of ticagrelor and 7.0% of clopidogrel treated patients (p0.014). Following adjustment, ticagrelor was associated with a 54% lower composite outcome (adjusted HR 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.26–0.84). Major bleeding 6.3% vs 6.1% (NS) and ICH 0.0% vs 0.2% (NS) were similar.

Conclusions

In a prospective STEMI cohort, switching to ticagrelor compared with sustaining clopidogrel following fibrinolysis pharmacoinvasive reperfusion reduced recurrent ischemic events at 1‐year with no differences in major bleeding or ICH. Aligned with randomized data, these findings provide support to switch pharmaco‐invasively treated STEMI patients.

Pharmacoinvasive Strategy Versus Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Clinical Practice: Insights From the Vital Heart Response Registry

BACKGROUND

Recent clinical trial data support a pharmacoinvasive strategy as an alternative to primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. We evaluated whether this is true in a real-world prehospital ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction network using ECG assessment of reperfusion coupled with clinical outcomes within 1 year.

METHODS

Of the 5583 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients in the Alberta Vital Heart Response Program (Cohort 1 [2006-2011]: n=3593; Cohort 2 [2013-2016]: n=1990), we studied 3287 patients who received a pharmacoinvasive strategy with tenecteplase (April 2013: half-dose tenecteplase was employed in prehospital patients ≥75 years) or pPCI. ECGs were analyzed within a core laboratory; sum ST-segment deviation resolution ≥50% was defined as successful reperfusion. The primary composite was all-cause death, congestive heart failure, cardiogenic shock, and recurrent myocardial infarction within 1 year.

RESULTS

The pharmacoinvasive approach was administered in 1805 patients (54.9%), (493 [27.3%] underwent rescue/urgent percutaneous coronary intervention and 1312 [72.7%] had scheduled angiography); pPCI was performed in 1482 patients (45.1%). There was greater ST-segment resolution post-catheterization/percutaneous coronary intervention with a pharmacoinvasive strategy versus pPCI (75.8% versus 64.3%, IP-weighted odds ratio, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.33-1.90; P<0.001). The primary composite was significantly lower with a pharmacoinvasive approach (16.3% versus 23.1%, IP-weighted hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.72-0.99; P=0.033). Major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage were similar between a pharmacoinvasive strategy and pPCI (7.6% versus 7.5%, P=0.867; 0.6% versus 0.6%; P=0.841, respectively). In the 82 patients ≥75 years with a prehospital pharmacoinvasive strategy, similar ST-segment resolution and rescue rates were observed with full-dose versus half-dose tenecteplase (75.8% versus 88.9%, P=0.259; 31.0% versus 29.2%, P=0.867) with no difference in the primary composite (31.0% versus 25.0%, P=0.585).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large Canadian ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction registry, a pharmacoinvasive strategy was associated with improved ST-segment resolution and enhanced outcomes within 1 year compared with pPCI. Our findings support the application of a selective pharmacoinvasive reperfusion strategy when delay to pPCI exists.

Transcatheter Valve-in-Valve: A Cautionary Tale

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) by valve-in-valve (VIV) implantation is an alternative treatment for high-risk patients with a degenerating aortic bioprosthesis. We present a case of transapical TAVR VIV with a 29-mm Edwards SAPIEN XT (ESV) (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA) into a 29-mm Medtronic Freestyle stentless bioprosthesis (Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, MN) in which unanticipated dilatation of the Freestyle bioprosthesis resulted in intraprocedural embolization of the TAVR valve, necessitating urgent conversion to a conventional surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR). Our experience suggests that TAVR VIV with the 29-mm ESV in the setting of a degenerated 29-mm Freestyle stentless bioprosthesis must be undertaken with caution.

Outcomes of consecutive patients referred for consideration for transcatheter aortic valve implantation from an encompassing health-care region

Procedural outcomes for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are well described. However, limited information exists regarding patient screening and selection. Thus, the purpose of the study was to review consecutive patients referred for TAVI from an inclusive-defined population. The Mazankowski Alberta Heart Institute TAVI program has maintained a prospective database on all referred patients. Patients are reviewed in outpatient clinic attended by a nurse, cardiologist, cardiac surgeon, and administrative assistant. After workup is complete, a TAVI Heart Team conference occurs to accept or reject each patient. Since November 2009, 276 patients (145 men and 131 women) have been referred with a steady increase in the number of referrals annually. Mean age was 82.2 years (men 81.6 and women 82.8), with 13% aged <70 years. Mean EuroSCORE was 13.8 and mean STS score was 5.7. Of the referred patients, 34% received TAVI, 17% were rejected, 12% underwent open AVR, 10% refused TAVI, and 27% are currently being assessed or followed. There were no differences in the mean EuroSCORE (13.4 vs 14.3; p = 0.64) or STS scores (5.2 vs 6.4; p = 0.13) of those accepted for TAVI versus those who were not. In conclusion, a team-based approach to assess this complex patient population is essential to ensure efficient and comprehensive evaluation, in turn determining appropriate care allocation. With expansion of clinical experience and the evidence supporting TAVI, the Heart Teams defined to assess this patient population will be burdened with increased clinical commitment and require appropriate support.