Fordyce, Christopher B.

Abstract Aims The Shock Academic Research Consortium (SHARC) recently proposed pragmatic consensus definitions to standardize classification of cardiogenic shock (CS) in registries and clinical trials. We aimed to describe contemporary CS epidemiology using the SHARC definitions in a cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) population. Methods and results The Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network (CCCTN) is a multinational research network of advanced CICUs coordinated by the TIMI Study Group (Boston, MA). Cardiogenic shock was defined as a cardiac disorder resulting in SBP < 90 mmHg for ≥30 min [or the need for vasopressors, inotropes, or mechanical circulatory support (MCS) to maintain SBP ≥ 90 mmHg] with evidence of hypoperfusion. Primary aetiologic categories included acute myocardial infarction-related CS (AMI-CS), heart failure-related CS (HF-CS), and non-myocardial (secondary) CS. Post-cardiotomy CS was not included. Heart failure-related CS was further subcategorized as de novo vs. acute-on-chronic HF-CS. Patients with both cardiogenic and non-cardiogenic components of shock were classified separately as mixed CS. Of 8974 patients meeting shock criteria (2017–23), 65% had isolated CS and 17% had mixed shock. Among patients with CS (n = 5869), 27% had AMI-CS (65% STEMI), 59% HF-CS (72% acute-on-chronic, 28% de novo), and 14% secondary CS. Patients with AMI-CS and de novo HF-CS were most likely to have had concomitant cardiac arrest (P < 0.001). Patients with AMI-CS and mixed CS were most likely to present in more severe shock stages (SCAI D or E; P < 0.001). Temporary MCS use was highest in AMI-CS (59%). In-hospital mortality was highest in mixed CS (48%), followed by AMI-CS (41%), similar in de novo HF-CS (31%) and secondary CS (31%), and lowest in acute-on-chronic HF-CS (25%; P < 0.001). Conclusion SHARC consensus definitions for CS classification can be pragmatically applied in contemporary registries and reveal discrete subpopulations of CS with distinct phenotypes and outcomes that may be relevant to clinical practice and future research.

Background: Mortality remains high in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS), and early reperfusion has been shown to improve outcomes. We analyzed the association between first medical contact (FMC)-to-percutaneous coronary angiography time with mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events among patients with STEMI with and without CS. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority STEMI registry, including all patients with STEMI who received primary percutaneous coronary angiography between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2020, and stratified them by presence or absence of CS at hospital arrival. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, the secondary outcome was in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as a composite of the first occurrence of mortality, cardiac arrest, heart failure, intracerebral hemorrhage, cerebrovascular accident, or reinfarction. Mixed effects logistic regression with restricted cubic splines was used to estimate the relationships between FMC-to-device time and the outcomes in the CS and non-CS groups. Results: 2929 patients were included, 9.4% (n=275) had CS. Median FMC-to-device time was 113.5 (interquartile range, 93.0–145.0) and 103.0 (interquartile range, 85.0–130.0) minutes for patients with CS and without CS, respectively. More patients with CS had FMC-to-device times above guideline recommendations (76.6% versus 54.1%, P <0.001). Between 60 and 90 minutes, for each 10-minute increase in FMC-to-device time, absolute mortality for patients with CS increased by 4% to 7%, whereas for patients without CS, it increased by <0.5%. Conclusions: Among patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary angiography, reperfusion delays among patients with CS are associated with significantly worse outcomes. Strategies to reduce FMC-to-device times for patients with STEMI presenting with CS are required.

AbstractAimsThe aims of the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network (CCCTN) are to develop a registry to investigate the epidemiology of cardiac critical illness and to establish a multicentre research network to conduct randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in patients with cardiac critical illness.Methods and resultsThe CCCTN was founded in 2017 with 16 centres and has grown to a research network of over 40 academic and clinical centres in the United States and Canada. Each centre enters data for consecutive cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) admissions for at least 2 months of each calendar year. More than 20 000 unique CICU admissions are now included in the CCCTN Registry. To date, scientific observations from the CCCTN Registry include description of variations in care, the epidemiology and outcomes of all CICU patients, as well as subsets of patients with specific disease states, such as shock, heart failure, renal dysfunction, and respiratory failure. The CCCTN has also characterised utilization patterns, including use of mechanical circulatory support in response to changes in the heart transplantation allocation system, and the use and impact of multidisciplinary shock teams. Over years of multicentre collaboration, the CCCTN has established a robust research network to facilitate multicentre registry-based randomised trials in patients with cardiac critical illness.ConclusionThe CCCTN is a large, prospective registry dedicated to describing processes-of-care and expanding clinical knowledge in cardiac critical illness. The CCCTN will serve as an investigational platform from which to conduct randomised controlled trials in this important patient population.

AbstractTargeted temperature management (TTM) has become a cornerstone in the treatment of comatose post-cardiac arrest patients over the last two decades. Belief in the efficacy of this intervention for improving neurologically intact survival was based on two trials from 2002, one truly randomized-controlled and one small quasi-randomized trial, without clear confirmation of that finding. Subsequent large randomized trials reported no difference in outcomes between TTM at 33 vs. 36°C and no benefit of TTM at 33°C as compared with fever control alone. Given that these results may help shape post-cardiac arrest patient care, we sought to review the history and rationale as well as trial evidence for TTM, critically review the TTM2 trial, and highlight gaps in knowledge and research needs for the future. Finally, we provide contemporary guidance for the use of TTM in daily clinical practice.

Objective To evaluate informal physician judgement versus pretest probability scores in estimating risk in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods We included 4533 patients from the PROMISE (Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain) trial. Physicians categorised a priori the pretest probability of obstructive CAD (≥70% or ≥50% left main); Diamond-Forrester (D-F) and European Society of Cardiology (ESC) pretest probability estimates were calculated. Agreement was calculated using the κ statistic; logistic regression evaluated estimates of pretest CAD probability and actual CAD (as determined by CT coronary angiography), and clinical outcomes were modelled using Cox proportional hazard models. Results Physician estimates agreed poorly with D-F (κ 0.16; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.18) and ESC (κ 0.04; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.05). Actual obstructive CAD was significantly more prevalent in both the high-likelihood (OR 3.30; 95% CI 2.30 to 4.74) and the intermediate-likelihood (OR 1.43; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.76) physician-estimated groups versus the low-likelihood group; ESC similarly differentiated between the three groups (OR 9.07; 95% CI 2.87 to 28.70; and OR 3.87; 95% CI 1.22 to 12.28). However, using D-F, only the high-probability group differed (OR 2.49; 95% CI 1.74 to 3.54). Only physician estimates were associated with a higher incidence of adjusted death/myocardial infarction/unstable angina hospitalisation in the high-probability versus low-probability group (HR 2.68; 95% CI 1.52 to 4.74); neither pretest probability score provided prognostic information. Conclusions Compared with D-F and ESC estimates, physician judgement more accurately identified obstructive CAD and worse patient outcomes. Integrating physician judgement may improve risk prediction for patients with stable chest pain. Trial registration number NCT01174550 .

Abstract Aims The incidence of respiratory failure and use of invasive or non-invasive mechanical ventilation (MV) in the cardiac intensive care units (CICUs) is increasing. While institutional MV volumes are associated with reduced mortality in medical and surgical ICUs, this volume–mortality relationship has not been characterized in the CICU. Methods and results National population-based data were used to identify patients admitted to CICUs (2005–2015) requiring MV in Canada. CICUs were categorized into low (≤100), intermediate (101–300), and high (&gt;300) volume centres based on spline knots identified in the association between annual MV volume and mortality. Outcomes of interest included all-cause in-hospital mortality, the proportion of patients requiring prolonged MV (&gt;96 h) and CICU length of stay (LOS). Among 47 173 CICU admissions requiring MV, 89.5% (42 200) required invasive MV. The median annual CICU MV volume was 43 (inter-hospital range 1–490). Compared to low-volume centres (35.9%), in-hospital mortality was lower in intermediate [29.2%, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72–0.97, P = 0.019] and high-volume (18.2%; aOR 0.82, 95% CI 0.66–1.02, P = 0.076) centres. Prolonged MV was higher in low-volume (29.2%) compared to high-volume (14.8%, aOR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55–0.89, P = 0.003) and intermediate-volume (23.0%, aOR 0.85, 95% CI 0.68–1.06, P = 0.14] centres. Mortality and prolonged MV were lower in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)-capable and academic centres, but a shorter CICU LOS was observed only in subgroup of PCI-capable intermediate- and high-volume hospitals. Conclusions In a national dataset, we observed that higher CICU MV volumes were associated with lower incidence of in-hospital mortality, prolonged MV, and CICU LOS. Our data highlight the need for minimum MV volume benchmarks for CICUs caring for patients with respiratory failure.

Background: Emerging evidence suggests that coronary intensive care units are evolving into intensive care environments with an increasing burden of non-cardiovascular illness, but previous studies have been limited to older populations or single center experiences. Methods: Canadian national health-care data was used to identify all patients ≥18 years admitted to dedicated coronary intensive care units (2005–2015) and admissions were categorized as primary cardiac or non-cardiac. The outcomes of interest included longitudinal trends in admission diagnoses, critical care therapies, and all-cause in-hospital mortality. Results: Among the 373,992 patients admitted to a coronary intensive care unit, minimal changes in the proportion of patients admitted with a primary cardiac (88.2% to 86.9%; p&lt;0.001) and non-cardiac diagnoses (11.8% to 13.1%; p&lt;0.001) were observed. Among cardiac admissions, a temporal increase in the proportion of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (19.4% to 24.1%, p&lt;0.001), non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (14.6% to 16.2%, p&lt;0.001), heart failure (7.3% to 8.4%, p&lt;0.001), shock (4.9% to 5.7%, p&lt;0.001), and decline in unstable angina (4.9% to 4.0%, p&lt;0.001) and stable coronary diseases (21.3% to 12.4%, p&lt;0.001) was observed. The proportion of patients requiring critical care therapies (57.8% to 63.5%, p&lt;0.001) including mechanical ventilation (9.6% to 13.1%, p&lt;0.001) increased. In-hospital mortality rates for patients with primary cardiac (4.9% to 4.4%; adjusted odds ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.63–0.79) and non-cardiac (17.8% to 16.1%; adjusted odds ratio 0.84, 0.73–0.97) declined; results were consistent when stratified by academic vs community hospital, and by the presence of on-site percutaneous coronary intervention. Conclusion: In a national dataset we observed a changing case-mix among patients admitted to a coronary intensive care unit, though the proportion of patients with a primary cardiac diagnosis remained stable. There was an increase in clinical acuity highlighted by critical care therapies, but in-hospital mortality rates for both primary cardiac and non-cardiac conditions declined across all hospitals. Our findings confirm the changing coronary intensive care unit case-mix and have implications for future coronary intensive care unit training and staffing.