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.
Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes Admitted to Contemporary Cardiac Intensive Care Units: Insights From the CCCTN Registry
Background: With the improvement in outcomes for acute coronary syndrome (ACS), the practice of routine admission to cardiac intensive care units (CICUs) is evolving. We aimed to describe the epidemiology of patients with ACS admitted to contemporary CICUs. Methods: Using the CCCTN (Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network) Registry for consecutive medical CICU admissions across 26 advanced CICUs in North America between 2017 and 2020, we identified patients with a primary diagnosis of ACS at CICU admission and compared patient characteristics, resource utilization, and outcomes to patients admitted with a non-ACS diagnosis and across sub-populations of patients with ACS, including by indication for CICU admission. Results: Of 10 118 CICU admissions, 29.4% (n=2978) were for a primary diagnosis of ACS, with significant interhospital variability (range, 13.4%–56.6%). Compared with patients admitted with a diagnosis other than ACS, patients with ACS had fewer comorbidities, lower acute severity of illness with less utilization of advanced CICU therapies (41.3% versus 66.1%, P <0.0001), and lower CICU mortality (5.4% versus 9.9%, P <0.0001). Monitoring alone, without another CICU indication at the time of admission, was the most frequent admission indication in patients with ACS (53.8%); less common indications in patients with ACS included respiratory insufficiency, shock, or the need for vasoactive therapy. Of patients with ACS admitted for monitoring alone, 94.8% did not subsequently require advanced intensive care unit therapies and had a low CICU length of stay (1.5 days [0.9–2.4] versus 2.6 [1.4–5.1], P <0.0001) and CICU mortality (0.6% versus 11.0%, P <0.0001), compared with patients with ACS with an admission indication beyond monitoring. Conclusions: In a registry of tertiary care CICUs, ACS represent ≈1/3 of all admissions with significant variability across hospitals. More than half of the ACS admissions to the CICU were for routine monitoring alone, with a low rate of complications and mortality. This observation highlights an opportunity for prospective studies to refine triage strategies for lower risk patients with ACS.
Targeted temperature management after out of hospital cardiac arrest: quo vadis?
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.
A pragmatic lab-based tool for risk assessment in cardiac critical care: data from the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network (CCCTN) Registry
Abstract Aims Contemporary cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) outcomes remain highly heterogeneous. As such, a risk-stratification tool using readily available lab data at time of CICU admission may help inform clinical decision-making. Methods and results The primary derivation cohort included 4352 consecutive CICU admissions across 25 tertiary care CICUs included in the Critical Care Cardiology Trials Network (CCCTN) Registry. Candidate lab indicators were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. An integer risk score incorporating the top independent lab indicators associated with in-hospital mortality was developed. External validation was performed in a separate CICU cohort of 9716 patients from the Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN, USA). On multivariable analysis, lower pH [odds ratio (OR) 1.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.72–2.24], higher lactate (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.22–1.62), lower estimated glomerular filtration rate (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.10–1.45), and lower platelets (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.05–1.32) were the top four independent lab indicators associated with higher in-hospital mortality. Incorporated into the CCCTN Lab-Based Risk Score, these four lab indicators identified a 20-fold gradient in mortality risk with very good discrimination (C-index 0.82, 95% CI 0.80–0.84) in the derivation cohort. Validation of the risk score in a separate cohort of 3888 patients from the Registry demonstrated good performance (C-index of 0.82; 95% CI 0.80–0.84). Performance remained consistent in the external validation cohort (C-index 0.79, 95% CI 0.77–0.80). Calibration was very good in both validation cohorts (r = 0.99). Conclusion A simple integer risk score utilizing readily available lab indicators at time of CICU admission may accurately stratify in-hospital mortality risk.
The association between cardiac intensive care unit mechanical ventilation volumes and in-hospital mortality
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 (>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 (>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.
Defining Shock and Preshock for Mortality Risk Stratification in Cardiac Intensive Care Unit Patients
Background: Previous studies have defined preshock as isolated hypotension or isolated hypoperfusion, whereas shock has been variably defined as hypoperfusion with or without hypotension. We aimed to evaluate the mortality risk associated with hypotension and hypoperfusion at the time of admission in a cardiac intensive care unit population. Methods: We analyzed Mayo Clinic cardiac intensive care unit patients admitted between 2007 and 2015. Hypotension was defined as systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg or mean arterial pressure <60 mm Hg, and hypoperfusion as admission lactate >2 mmol/L, oliguria, or rising creatinine. Associations between hypotension and hypoperfusion with hospital mortality were estimated using multivariable logistic regression. Results: Among 10 004 patients with a median age of 69 years, 43.1% had acute coronary syndrome, and 46.1% had heart failure. Isolated hypotension was present in 16.7%, isolated hypoperfusion in 15.3%, and 8.7% had both hypotension and hypoperfusion. Stepwise increases in hospital mortality were observed with hypotension and hypoperfusion compared with neither hypotension nor hypoperfusion (3.3%; all P <0.001): isolated hypotension, 9.3% (adjusted odds ratio, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.4–2.2]); isolated hypoperfusion, 17.2% (adjusted odds ratio, 2.3 [95% CI, 1.9–3.0]); both hypotension and hypoperfusion, 33.8% (adjusted odds ratio, 2.8 [95% CI, 2.1–3.6]). Adjusted hospital mortality in patients with isolated hypoperfusion was higher than in patients with isolated hypotension ( P =0.02) and not significant different from patients with both hypotension and hypoperfusion ( P =0.18). Conclusions: Hypotension and hypoperfusion are both associated with increased mortality in cardiac intensive care unit patients. Hospital mortality is higher with isolated hypoperfusion or concomitant hypotension and hypoperfusion (classic shock). We contend that preshock should refer to isolated hypotension without hypoperfusion, while patients with hypoperfusion can be considered to have shock, irrespective of blood pressure.
Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome Is Associated With Increased Mortality Across the Spectrum of Shock Severity in Cardiac Intensive Care Patients
Background: The systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) frequently occurs in patients with cardiogenic shock and may aggravate shock severity and organ failure. We sought to determine the association of SIRS with illness severity and survival across the spectrum of shock severity in cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) patients. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 8995 unique patients admitted to the Mayo Clinic CICU between 2007 and 2015. Patients with ≥2/4 SIRS criteria based on admission laboratory and vital sign data were considered to have SIRS. Patients were stratified by the 2019 Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) shock stages using admission data. The association between SIRS and mortality was evaluated across SCAI shock stage using logistic regression and Cox proportional-hazards models for hospital and 1-year mortality, respectively. Results: The study population had a mean age of 67.5±15.2 years, including 37.2% women. SIRS was present in 33.9% of patients upon CICU admission and was more prevalent in advanced SCAI shock stages. Patients with SIRS had higher illness severity, worse shock, and more organ failure, with an increased risk of mortality during hospitalization (16.8% versus 3.8%; adjusted odds ratio, 2.1 [95% CI, 1.7–2.5]; P <0.001) and at 1 year (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.3–1.6]; P <0.001). After multivariable adjustment, SIRS was associated with higher hospital and 1-year mortality among patients in SCAI shock stages A through D (all P <0.01) but not SCAI shock stage E. Conclusions: One-third of CICU patients meet clinical criteria for SIRS at the time of admission, and these patients have higher illness severity and worse outcomes across the spectrum of SCAI shock stages. The presence of SIRS identified CICU patients at increased risk of short-term and long-term mortality. Further study is needed to determine whether systemic inflammation truly drives SIRS in this population and whether patients with SIRS respond differently to supportive therapies for shock.