Ting, Henry H.

Background— Clinical trials have shown that statin therapy reduces cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), even among patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels <100 mg/dL. We sought to determine the extent to which patients with obstructive CAD in routine outpatient care are treated with statins, nonstatins, or no lipid-lowering therapy. Methods and Results— Within the American College of Cardiology's Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence (PINNACLE) outpatient registry, we examined rates of treatment with statin and nonstatin medications in 38 775 outpatients with obstructive CAD (history of myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization) and without documented contraindications to statin therapy. Among these patients, 30 160 (77.8%) were prescribed statins, 2042 (5.3%) were treated only with nonstatin lipid-lowering medications, and 6573 (17.0%) were untreated. Lack of medical insurance was associated with no statin treatment, and male sex, coexisting hypertension, and a recent coronary revascularization were associated with statin treatment. Among those not on any lipid-lowering therapy, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were available for 51.2% (3365/6573). Among these untreated patients, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were <100 mg/dL in 1794 patients (53.3%) and ≥100 mg/dL in 1571 patients (46.7%). Conclusions— Despite robust clinical trial evidence, a substantial number of patients with obstructive CAD remain untreated with statins. A small proportion were treated with nonstatin therapy, and 1 in 6 patients was simply untreated; half of the untreated patients had low-density lipoprotein cholesterol values <100 mg/dL. These findings illustrate important opportunities to improve lipid management in outpatients with obstructive CAD.

Background— Circadian rhythms with regard to time of symptom onset for patients with acute myocardial infarction have been observed, although their relationship to outcomes has been debated. We evaluated these rhythms in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction as a function of the 24-hour circadian cycle. Methods and Results— The relationship between onset of symptoms during the 24-hour circadian cycle and prehospital delays from symptom onset to hospital arrival, timeliness of reperfusion, and in-hospital death was assessed in 2143 patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction presenting from 2004–2008 at 1 of 3 tertiary-care healthcare ST-elevation myocardial infarction systems. There was a significant association between time of onset and the circadian cycle, with the greatest percentage (39%) of patients experiencing onset between 8 am and 3 pm ( P <0.001). Time of onset was associated with prehospital delay and timeliness of reperfusion. Patients with onset from 12 am to 5:59 am had median prehospital delays of 121 minutes versus 70 minutes from 12 pm to 5:59 pm ( P <0.001). Patients with onset time from 12 am to 5:59 am had median door-to-balloon times of 75 minutes versus 60 minutes from 6 am to 11:59 am ( P <0.001). Using multivariable modeling to control for baseline patient characteristics, prehospital delay, and timeliness of reperfusion, there was no significant association between time of symptom onset with in-hospital death. Conclusions— Patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction exhibit significant circadian patterns in symptom onset, prehospital delay, and timeliness of reperfusion. Patients who develop symptoms from 12 am to 5:59 am present with longer prehospital delays and have longer door-to-balloon times. After multivariable adjustment, there was no significant association between circadian patterns of time of onset and in-hospital death.

Background— American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines recommend a door-to-balloon time (DTB) <90 minutes for nontransferred patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who undergo primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Systems of care to achieve and sustain this DTB performance over several years have not been previously reported. Methods and Results— The Mayo Clinic STEMI protocol was implemented in April 2004 and included activation of the cardiac catheterization laboratory by the emergency medicine physician; a single call system to activate the catheterization laboratory; catheterization laboratory staff arrival within 20 to 30 minutes of activation; and real-time performance feedback within 24 to 48 hours. Data were collected on nontransferred STEMI patients. The preimplementation group (June 2002 to March 2004) comprised 96 patients with a median DTB of 97 (interquartile range, 82, 130) minutes, and 40% had a DTB <90 minutes. The postimplementation group (May 2004 to March 2008) comprised 322 patients with a median DTB of 67 (interquartile range, 55, 82) minutes, and 81% had a DTB <90 minutes. Postimplementation DTB was significantly shorter than preimplementation DTB ( P <0.001). In the 4-year follow-up after protocol implementation, the DTB performance remained stable over time ( P =0.41). Conclusions— The Mayo Clinic STEMI protocol implemented strategies to reduce DTB for nontransferred patients with STEMI. DTB was significantly reduced, and the results were sustained over the 4-year follow-up period. Our experience demonstrates the effectiveness and durability of process changes targeting timeliness of primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

Background— There have been significant bidirectional changes in the prevalence of cardiovascular (CV) risk factors over time in the United States, making the net trend in risk for incident CV disease unknown. We assessed these trends by applying the Framingham Heart Study prediction model to national data. Methods and Results— The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) II (1976–1980), NHANES III (1988–1994), and NHANES 1999–2004 are cross-sectional representative samples of the noninstitutionalized population of the United States. We excluded people with a history of CV disease, pregnant women, participants with missing CV risk factors data, and individuals outside the Framingham age range of 30 to 74 years. The Framingham risk function was used to estimate the 10-year risk for incident symptomatic CV disease. We calculated the slope of change or rate of change per year between NHANES II and III, and between NHANES III and 1999–2004. The difference between slopes was calculated and compared to zero. The average age-adjusted 10-year CV risk between NHANES II and III decreased from 10.0% to 7.9% between NHANES II and III, with a statistically significant slope ( P <0.001). However, the average age-adjusted CV risk decreased at a lesser magnitude between NHANES III and NHANES 1999–2004 from 7.9% to 7.4% ( P <0.001). These slopes were significantly different ( P <0.0001). In women and middle-aged participants, CV risk did not change between NHANES III and NHANES 1999–2004 ( P =0.40). Conclusions— The estimated net risk for CV disease in the US population decreased from 1976–1980 to 1988–1994 but has changed minimally from 1988–1994 to 1999–2004, particularly in women and middle-aged people.

Background— Better insight into the psychosocial factors associated with prehospital delays in seeking care for acute coronary syndromes is needed to inform the design of future interventions. Delay in presenting for care after the onset of symptoms is common, limits the potential benefit of acute reperfusion, and has not been reduced by interventions tested thus far. Methods and Results— Seven hundred ninety-six patients with suspected ischemic heart disease scheduled for clinically indicated imaging stress tests completed questionnaires concerning psychological distress and attachment styles (worthiness to receive care, trustworthiness of others to provide care). The primary dependent variable for this study was response to a question from the rapid early action for coronary treatment trial concerning intention to “wait until very sure” before seeking care for a possible “heart attack.” Responses to this question were strongly associated with actual emergency department-reported and self-reported care delay in the rapid early action for coronary treatment trial. In multivariable ordinal regression models, a more negative view of the trustworthiness of others, greater physical limitations from angina, and no previous revascularization were independently associated with increased intention to wait to seek care for a myocardial infarction. Intention to wait was not associated with inducible ischemia or self-perceived risk of myocardial infarction. Conclusions— Intention to delay seeking care for acute coronary syndromes is associated with a patient’s view of the trustworthiness of others, previous experience with revascularization, and functional limitations, even after adjustment for objective and perceived acute coronary syndromes risk. These findings provide insight into novel factors contributing to longer delay times and may inform future interventions to reduce delay time.